Redlands City Council
October 1, 2024

residential units. Parcel 2 is 3.2 gross acres, is currently vacant and is the proposed location for the Density Bonus Units.

The new portions to be developed are designed to be a logical extension of the existing development. Upon completion of the project, the existing portions of the project and the density bonus portion will be developed in a seamless and cohesive manner.

9. Existing On-site Land Use and Setting:

The project site is a vacant 3.2- acre portion of the Venue at Orange apartments.

The site is approximately 326’ wide (east to west) and 436’ long (north to south). It is a nearly rectangular piece of property located just to the south of the existing Venue at Orange.

10. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement): None.

COST BENEFIT FACTORS:

The cost benefit factors are evaluated independently using the cost benefit model. A positive or negative cost/benefit ratio will be derived by evaluating projects. A complete model used to evaluate the project is available in the Development Services Department.

A summary of that analysis is provided here:

According to the Cost Benefit Model used by the City, this project will provide the City approximately $141,542 in revenue and costs of $107,219 resulting in a positive balance of $34,321 with a Cost Benefit Ratio of 1.28 over the period of 2025-2034.

PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE AND EFFECT ON THE CITY OF REDLANDS:

Identify the public infrastructure required for development of this project and identify the source(s) of funding for these improvements. Identify the effects of such development upon the City of Redlands.

a) List of public infrastructure required for the project:

The applicant will provide the infrastructure as required by the Municipal Utilities and Engineering Department. The project has no immediate street frontage, and all existing public facilities are currently in place. There are no required off -site improvements due to the presence of existing development surrounding the proposed project. The project will tie into existing utilities and will be required to repair any damage to existing facilities as a result of future connections if any Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
322 of 932
Socio-Economic Cost/Benefit Study
The Venue at Orange Phase 2

occurs.

b) Sources of funding for these improvements to include developer installed payment of impact fees, assessment districts, etc.:

The developer will be required to pay applicable Development Impact Fees and permit fees as required by the Redlands Municipal Code.

c) The effect of the project upon the City of Redlands relative to public infrastructure is as follows:

This project will impact existing public infrastructure systems. However, any impact or maintenance costs will be offset by the developer’s payment of Development Impact Fees and extension of utility lines into the project site.

BENEFITS OF THE PROJECT TO THE CITY OF REDLANDS:

The following is a list of benefits that can be attributed to the proposed project. The benefits may fall into the categories identified or a miscellaneous category. Each benefit identified will be described in detail with supporting reasons as to how the item benefits the community.

A. Citrus Enhancements or Preservation . Does the project preserve citrus? The following are accepted ways to enhance or preserve citrus which may be determined to be a benefit to the City of Redlands.

1. Provide conservation easement(s) on citrus groves the City hopes to preserve.

2. Acquire citrus grove(s) and donate all or a portion of the grove to the City.

3. Enhance viability and productivity of existing groves by enhancing irrigation or adding frost water.

4. Maintain a viable buffer of citrus around the project (at least 3 rows).

5. Other ways to preserve citrus.

If this project provides benefit(s) that apply to citrus enhancement or preservation, describe in detail the benefit(s) with supporting reasons as to how the item(s) benefits the community.

Proposed Project: The project will not benefit citrus or agriculture. No citrus will be Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
323 of 932
Socio-Economic Cost/Benefit Study
The Venue at Orange Phase 2

removed by the project and no agriculture or citrus preservation is proposed.

B. Cultural Enhancements or Preservation. Does the project enhance or preserve cultural aspects of the community? The following are accepted ways to enhance and/or preserve cultural aspects of the community which may be determined to be a benefit to the City of Redlands.

1. Contributes to “art in public places” concept to a minimum of 1% of total project value.

2. Contributes to the alleviation of problems at cultural sites.

3. Provides an electronic library available to the public.

4. Enhances or contributes to current services or cultural resources.

5. Contribute to performing arts venues.

If this project provides benefit(s) that apply to cultural enhancements or preservation, describe in detail the benefit(s) with supporting reasons as to how the item(s) benefits the community.

Proposed Project: The project does not propose contributions or enhancements to cultural aspects of the community. The project will pay City established Development Impact Fees and provide additional revenue from increased property tax assessment, business license tax, and other revenue sources that will indirectly provide funding that will contribute to enhancing and/or maintaining some of the cultural facilities within the City.

C. Heritage Enhancements or Preservation. Does the project enhance or preserve heritage aspects of the community? The following are accepted ways to enhance and/or preserve heritage aspects of the community which may be determined to be a benefit to the City of Redlands.

1. Renovates existing historic homes.

2. The project has design features which include garage doors do not face street; 50% wrap around porch on 1- 1/2 sides; broad overhangs on roof; driveway located on the side of house or a circular drive; decorative wood, masonry or wrought iron fence.

3. Adaptive reuse of historic structures in appropriate zones.

4. Forming a new or annexing to an existing historic district.

5. Designation of a structure as an individual historic resource.

If this project provides benefit(s) that apply to heritage enhancements or preservation, describe in detail the benefit(s) with supporting reasons as to how the item(s) benefits the community.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
324 of 932
Socio-Economic Cost/Benefit Study
The Venue at Orange Phase 2

Proposed Project: The property is not located within a Historic and Scenic District.

The site does not contain any historical structures . No structures on site are considered historic and therefore no structures on the site will be adaptively reused.

D. Architectural Enhancements. Does the project enhance architectural aspects of the community? The following are accepted ways to enhance architectural aspects of the community which may be determined to be a benefit to the City of Redlands.

1. Provide architectural or decorative enhancements to the project which exceed normal architectural standards.

2. Trees or other landscaping amenities that exceed minimum requirements.

3. Contribution of off -site enhancements in the public right -of-way, such as sidewalk installation and street tree replacement.

4. Assisting in undergrounding of utility lines.

If this project provides benefit(s) that apply to architectural enhancements, describe in detail the benefit(s) with supporting reasons as to how the item(s) benefits the community.

Proposed Project: The project includes public landscape areas within parkway areas and landscaped setback areas along Alabama Street, Iowa Street and Orange Avenue. The project includes 360-degree architecture with projections and recessed elements on all four sides but does not significantly exceed landscaping or architectural standards.

E. Historic Downtown Enhancements or Preservation. Does the project enhance or preserve the historic downtown of the community? The following are accepted ways to enhance and/or preserve the historic downtown of the community which may be determined to be a benefit to the City of Redlands.

1. Contributes financially to viability of core downtown within expanded downtown.

2. Renovate old buildings.

3. Within an expanded downtown extends DRBA streetscape enhancements.

4. Contributing to the restoration of original building facades of existing structures

5. Re-establishing historical “pedestrian oriented” street frontages where original buildings have been removed.

6. Provides unique adaptive use of historic building.

7. Contributes to alternative means of transportation.

If this project provides benefit(s) that apply to historic downtown enhancements or preservation, describe in detail the benefit(s) with supporting reasons as to how the item(s) Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
325 of 932
Socio-Economic Cost/Benefit Study
The Venue at Orange Phase 2

benefits the community.

Proposed Project: The project is not located within the historic downtown district.

The project will pay City established Development Impact Fees and provide significant additional revenue from increased property tax assessment, business license tax, and other revenue sources that will indirectly provide funding that could be utilized to enhance and/or maintain the downtown district.

F. Job Enhancements. Does the project enhance jobs for the community? The following are accepted ways to enhance jobs for the community which may be determined to be a benefit to the City of Redlands.

1. Provides jobs for the community.

2. Brings in revenue from outside the city.

3. Internship opportunities for students at universities, high school and colleges.

If this project provides benefit(s) that apply to job enhancements, describe in detail the benefit(s) with supporting reasons as to how the item(s) benefits the community.

Proposed Project: The project is a residential development and will not create a significant number of jobs. Jobs created may be related to those related to the construction activities necessary to develop the apartment project area and those required to provide the services related to the operation and maintenance of the project upon completion. The additional housing opportunities provided by the project will be available to local and regional employees who work in Redlands, and some may be able to relocate to Redlands as a result of expanded housing opportunities. It is also anticipated that the presence of these new residents will stimulate other sectors of the local economy (i.e., goods, services, and other expenditures in Redlands due to the additional local residents and their family members).

G. Open Space Enhancements or Preservation. Does the project enhance or preserve open space aspects of the community? The following are accepted ways to enhance and/or preserve open space within the community which may be determined to be a benefit to the City of Redlands.

1. Hardscape feature that enhances wildlife-water/food/ shelter.

2. Enhanced landscape on commercial project which conceals infrastructure.

3. Waterscaping which increases illusion of open space.

4. Provides open space in addition to zoning requirement.

5. Provides a Planned Residential Development

6. Provides a usable conservation easement across open space Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
326 of 932
Socio-Economic Cost/Benefit Study
The Venue at Orange Phase 2

in perpetuity.

7. Preserves access for wildlife migration corridor.

8. Provides undisturbed refuge area for wildlife.

If this project provides benefit(s) that apply to open space enhancements or preservation, describe in detail the benefit(s) with supporting reasons as to how the item(s) benefits the community.

Proposed Project : The project will not detrimentally impact any open space features or amenities of the City of Redlands, nor affect wildlife. The project will not provide open space in excess of what is required by the zone within the southern portion of the project.

H. Park Enhancements or Preservation. Does the project enhance or preserve parks of the community? The following are accepted ways to enhance and/or preserve parks within the community which may be determined to be a benefit to the City of Redlands.

1. Adds improved parkland.

2. Adds parkland beyond requirements.

3. Provides pedestrian and/or bike trails to parks or provides extension of existing pedestrian and/or bike trails from the project site.

4. Adds meeting rooms accessible to local groups on a frequent basis.

5. Improves or adds to existing landscape and/or streetscape at or near the project site.

If this project provides benefit(s) that apply to park enhancements or preservation, describe in detail the benefit(s) with supporting reasons as to how the item(s) benefits the community.

Proposed Project: The proposed project does not enhance or preserve parks of the community but will provide onsite amenities for the onsite residents such as a pool, tot lot, putting green and outdoor seating areas. The project will pay City established Development Impact Fees and provide additional revenue from increased property tax assessment, business license tax, and other revenue sources that will indirectly provide funding that will contribute to enhancing and/or maintaining some of the existing park facilities within the City.

I. Public Safety Enhancements. Does the project enhance public safety aspects of the community? The following are accepted ways to enhance public safety within the community which may be determined to be a benefit to the City of Redlands.

1. Security infrastructure is provided in an architecturally acceptable manner.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
327 of 932
Socio-Economic Cost/Benefit Study
The Venue at Orange Phase 2

2. Exterior television monitoring on commercial project.

3. Provide a building site or fully equipped fire station or contributes to dedicated City account for future construction.

4. Provides significant additional fire equipment as determined by the Fire Department.

5. Provides for a police substation (subject to City approval).

6. Provides for a building site for a new facility.

If this project provides benefit(s) that apply to public safety enhancements, describe in detail the benefit(s) with supporting reasons as to how the item(s) benefits the community.

Proposed Project: The project will pay Development Impact Fees which have been established by the City to fund public facilities, including police and public safety services. The project will include security lighting adjacent to the building and parking areas. The project and its future residents will also provide additional revenue from increased property tax assessment and sales tax revenue, which will assist in funding police and public safety operations.

J. School Enhancements. Does the project enhance schools or their operations within the community? The following are accepted ways to enhance schools within the community which may be determined to be a benefit to the City of Redlands.

1. Senior citizen development adds revenue but no impact.

2. Provides day care and after school program(s).

3. Project is close to schools serving the project.

4. Contributes equipment or other enhancements to existing day care and after school programs.

5. Assist schools with land or financing (such as Mello Roos).

If this project provides benefit(s) that apply to schools, describe in detail the benefit(s) with supporting reasons as to how the item(s) benefits the community.

Proposed Project : The project site is within close proximity to schools in the community. The project will pay State-established School Fees that will assist in the future funding of school facilities. Future property owners will also pay the applicable annual property taxes.

K. Traffic. Does the project reduce traffic, enhance systems to improve traffic conditions or otherwise improve traffic within the community? The following are accepted ways to improve traffic within the community which may be determined to be a benefit to the City of Redlands.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
328 of 932
Socio-Economic Cost/Benefit Study
The Venue at Orange Phase 2

1. Provide financial mitigation which helps alleviate parking problems in town i.e. by contributing to the parking district.

2. Incorporate “traffic calming” elements into the design of the circulation system.

3. Support for alternative forms of public transportation or public transportation facilities.

4. Add biking and pedestrian access to off campus intellectual or entertainment resources.

5. Have a unique method of product/inventory delivery.

If this project provides benefit(s) that apply to traffic, describe in detail the benefit(s) with supporting reasons as to how the item(s) benefits the community.

Proposed Project: The proposed project will consist of 164 apartment units. The project does not include specific traffic reduction measures.

L. Wastewater System Enhancements. Does the project enhance the wastewater system within the community? The following are accepted ways to improve the wastewater system within the community which may be determined to be a benefit to the City of Redlands.

1. Provide a dual system to use potable and non-potable water.

2. Provide financial contributions to tertiary facilities at the Wastewater Treatment Plant.

3. Improve water quality.

If this project provides benefit(s) that apply to the wastewater system, describe in detail the benefit(s) with supporting reasons as to how the item(s) benefits the community.

Proposed Project: The project will be required to construct any required public infrastructure and connections as a standard requirement for such development projects. The project does not warrant any improvements or expansion to the City- wide system, and the project does not propose any enhancements to the larger wastewater system. However, the project applicant will be required to pay their fair share of development impact fees for wastewater systems as a standard requirement for such development projects

M. Miscellaneous Preservation or Enhancements. Does the project enhance or preserve elements within the community?

If this project provides benefit(s) that apply to enhancement or preservation of elements Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
329 of 932
Socio-Economic Cost/Benefit Study
The Venue at Orange Phase 2

that are important to the City, describe in detail the benefit(s) with supporting reasons as to how the item(s) benefits the community.

Proposed Project: The project does not provide any additional or miscellaneous enhancements or preservation of elements within the community other than those previously identified (discussion above).

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
330 of 932
Socio-Economic Cost/Benefit Study
The Venue at Orange Phase 2

SOCIAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:

This project may create unmitigable physical blight or overburden public services for those social factors checked below within the "Potentially Significant," “Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation” or "Less Than Significant" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.

_ Agricultural/Citrus Removal
Wildlife/Habitat
Traffic
Fire Services
Paramedic Services

 Police Services
Downtown Impacts
 Residential Design
Cultural Facilities
 Park Facilities

Recreational Programs
 Land Use Compatibility
_ Schools

DETERMINATION
On the basis of this initial evaluation:

X I find that the proposed project will not create unmitigable physical blight or overburden public services in the community, and no additional information or evaluation is needed.

I find that although the proposed project could create unmitigable physical blight or overburden public services in the community, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project by the applicant.

I find that the proposed project may create unmitigable physical blight or overburden public services in the community, and additional information or evaluation is needed in the following areas:

I find that the proposed project has already been evaluated for socio- economic impacts and the prior evaluation adequately evaluated this project.

Signed:

Sean Reilly
Principal Planner
City of Redlands
June 6, 2024
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
331 of 932
Socio-Economic Cost/Benefit Study
The Venue at Orange Phase 2

EVALUATION OF SOCIAL FACTORS
Explanations of all "Potentially Significant," "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated," "Less Than Significant Impact," and "No Impact" answers are provided on the attached pages.

Issues and Supporting Information Sources:

Potentially
Significant
Impact

Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated

Less Than
Significant
Impact

No
Impact

1. AGRICULTURAL/CITRUS REMOVAL.

Would the proposal:

a) Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g.
impacts to soils or farmlands, or impac ts from
incompatible land uses)?

_



b) Remove active citrus groves from production?

_



Agricultural/Citrus Removal – Discussion

a, b) No Impact. None of the parcels located within the project area are zoned for or in agricultural production. The project has a General Plan Designation of Medium Density Residential and is zoned for residential uses. There is no active agricultural use onsite. The property is not currently part of a larger farmland, orchard, or other agricultural purpose.

The proposed project would remove the small portion of planted area on site containing citrus and avocado trees. However, while the project site has been used for agricultural purposes in the past, the site is zoned for residential uses. Impacts would be less than significant.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
332 of 932
Socio-Economic Cost/Benefit Study
The Venue at Orange Phase 2

Issues and Supporting Information Sources:

Potentially
Significant
Impact

Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated

Less Than
Significant
Impact

No
Impact

2. WILDLIFE/HABITAT/OPEN SPACE PRESERVATION.

Would the proposal:

a) Eliminate or have negative impact upon wildlife
corridors?

b) Tend to urbanize open space
impacting preservation and
conservation of natural resources?

_





c) Interfere with use of recognized trails
used by joggers, hikers, equestrians
or bicyclists?

d) Eliminate, reduce, or have any negative
impact upon wildlife habitat areas to include
the protection of fringe or buffer areas?





Wildlife/Habitat/Open Space Preservation – Discussion
a and d) No Impact. T he project site is not located within a CDFW designated Essential Habitat Connectivity Area or a Natural Landscape Block. In addition, the project site does not function as a wildlife movement corridor. The project site does not contain wildlife travel routes, such as a riparian strip, ridgeline, or drainage; or wildlife crossings, such as a tunnel, culvert, or underpass. The project site does not represent a wildlife movement corridor because it is completely disturbed; covered in nonnative grasses and other non-native vegetation; and entirely surrounded by development, walls, fencing, and roadways. These permanent structures serve as significant barriers to wildlife movement through the project site and region. The project site contains residential and commercial structures, vacant parcels and a closed commercial nursery in the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan area of Redlands, which is intended for high-quality commercial, industrial, and residential development. There are roadways surrounding the site on three sites, which serve as barriers to wildlife movement. Therefore, the project is not likely to serve as a migratory corridor and would not interfere with the movement of any native resident or species.

These conditions preclude the possibility of related impacts. No impact would occur.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
333 of 932
Socio-Economic Cost/Benefit Study
The Venue at Orange Phase 2

b) The project would not urbanize planned open space as designated on the General Plan Land Use Map there are no conservation areas located within the immediate vicinity of the project.

c) The project will not interfere with the use of recognized trails used by joggers, hikers, equestrians or bicyclists. The project is a part of a previous development that included off-site improvements, including sidewalk and bike lanes, which provide connectivity for pedestrian circulation within the area.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
334 of 932
Socio-Economic Cost/Benefit Study
The Venue at Orange Phase 2

Issues and Supporting Information Sources:

Potentially
Significant
Impact

Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated

Less Than
Significant
Impact

No
Impact

3. TRAFFIC.

Would the proposal:

a) Result in increased vehicle trips or
congestion?

b.) Create additional traffic so as to be in
conflict with the policies of the General Plan?

c.) Does traffic impact livability of a residential
neighborhood on streets which, due to design
or terrain features, street side development or
other factors, have greater than usual
sensitivity to increased traffic?

__





_

d.) Create additional traffic so as to increase the level of service on roadways that are adjacent to or in the
vicinity of the project?

_

_

Traffic – Discussion

a, b, and d)
The proposed project will result in increased vehicle trips within the project area; however, these vehicle trips would not cause an impact that would be in conflict with the policies of the General Plan. The proposed project will not result in any significant effects from trip generation or traffic as a result of constructing 164 apartments. Local roads have sufficient capacity and can provide sufficient vehicle access to the project site. Regional access to the project site is provided by Alabama Street, Interstate 10 freeway, and the 210 freeway. The proposed project will not create additional traffic that will increase the level of service on roadways that are within the vicinity of the project.

c) T he project will not create a traffic impact in terms of livability of a residential neighborhood which, due to design or terrain features, street side development or other factors, have greater than usual sensitivity to increased traffic. The project is a residential use. Final project site plans would be subject to City review and approval, which would ensure that project driveway intersections and internal circulation are safe, with adequate sight distance, driveway widths and Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
335 of 932
Socio-Economic Cost/Benefit Study
The Venue at Orange Phase 2

stop signs where necessary for entering and exiting the site. This would prevent any impacts due to a design feature.

Furthermore, a construction work site traffic control plan shall be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to the start of any construction work. The plans shall show the location of any roadway, sidewalk, bike route, bus stop or driveway closures, traffic detours, haul routes, hours of operation, protective devices, warning signs and access to abutting properties.

Temporary traffic controls used around the construction area should adhere to the standards set forth in the California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices and construction activities should adhere to applicable local ordinances.

Consequently, on-site improvements and improvements adjacent to the site will be required in conjunction with the proposed development to ensure adequate circulation within the project.

A construction work site traffic control plan shall be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to the issuance of a grading permit or start of any construction work. The plans shall show the location of any roadway, sidewalk, bike route, bus stop or driveway closures, traffic detours, haul routes, hours of operation, protective devices, warning signs and access to abutting properties. Temporary traffic controls used around the construction area must adhere to the standards set forth in the California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (2014) and construction activities should adhere to applicable local ordinances.

Site development would require the use of haul trucks during site clearing and excavation and the use of a variety of other construction vehicles throughout the construction work at the site. Transportation of heavy construction equipment and or materials, which requires the use of oversized vehicles, will require the appropriate transportation permit. The City shall review all proposed development and construction work site traffic control plans to ensure that public, pedestrian, and school safety are addressed.

Issues and Supporting Information Sources:

Potentially
Significant
Impact

Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated

Less Than
Significant
Impact

No
Impact

4. FIRE & PARAMEDIC SERVICES.

Will the proposal result in:

a) Requiring fire and paramedic services that are


Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
336 of 932
Socio-Economic Cost/Benefit Study
The Venue at Orange Phase 2

Issues and Supporting Information Sources:

Potentially
Significant
Impact

Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated

Less Than
Significant
Impact

No
Impact
beyond the current capabilities of the Fire
Department?

b) An increase in response time for essential fire or
paramedic services to the remainder of the
community?



c) The need for additional fire or paramedic facilities or equipment?



Fire & Paramedic Services – Discussion

a-c) The project would result in a significant environmental impact if new or physically altered fire protection facilities would need to be built to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for fire protection. According to the General Plan Public Safety Element, fire services are provided to the City of Redlands by the Redlands Fire Department. The majority of Redlands is served by four fire stations within the City, and can be reached within a four minute response time. The fire station nearest to the project site is Fire Station No. 264 located at 1270 West Park Avenue, approximately 0.72 mile northeast of the site. The project will pay all associated development impact fees in relation to fire protection.

Therefore, the project would not have a significant impact on facilities or response times for the Redlands Fire Department because it is located in the existing service area of the Redlands Fire Department, near an existing station. While the General Plan EIR identifies a general need for more stations and staff to meet minimum response times, the payment of development fees will help to alleviate this burden.

No new expanded fire protection facilities would be required as a result of the project. Impacts to fire services would be less than significant.

Issues and Supporting Information Sources:

Potentially
Significant
Impact

Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated

Less Than
Significant
Impact

No
Impact

5. POLICE SERVICES.

Would the proposal result in:

a) Requiring police services that are beyond the
current capabilities of the Police Department?



b) An increase in response time for essential police
services to the remainder of the community?



Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
337 of 932
Socio-Economic Cost/Benefit Study
The Venue at Orange Phase 2

Issues and Supporting Information Sources:

Potentially
Significant
Impact

Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated

Less Than
Significant
Impact

No
Impact
c) The need for additional police facilities or
equipment?

d) Increase in crime as a result of the
type of business?







Police Services – Discussion

a-d) The City of Redlands Police Department will provide services to the project site. The Police Department contains an Operations Division and an Investigations and Support Services Division. In addition to sworn patrol officers, the Department has several sub-units, including Investigations, the Multiple Enforcement Team, Narcotics, and volunteers. Police services are generally financed through the General Fund. The project will pay Development Impact Fees, which have been established by the City to fund public facilities, including police. The project and its future residents will also provide additional revenue to the City resulting from increased property tax assessment revenue, which will assist in funding police operations. Additionally, the project will be required to provide and implement a site security plan during grading and construction to ensure that impacts from construction site theft are kept at a less than significant level.. Less than significant impacts are anticipated, and no special mitigation measures are required.

Issues and Supporting Information Sources:

Potentially
Significant
Impact

Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated

Less Than
Significant
Impact

No
Impact

6. DOWNTOWN IMPACTS.

Would the proposal result in:

a) A reduction of the number or types of businesses
located in the downtown?



b) An unfair or unreasonable competitive disadvantage
to existing businesses downtown?



c) Creation of vacant buildings and the potential for
blight?



Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
338 of 932
Socio-Economic Cost/Benefit Study
The Venue at Orange Phase 2

Issues and Supporting Information Sources:

Potentially
Significant
Impact

Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated

Less Than
Significant
Impact

No
Impact
d) Cause an unreasonable increase in
traffic downtown?

e) Economic and social effects of
businesses competing with downtown
businesses?





Downtown Impacts – Discussion

a-e) The proposed project includes a residential development located approximately 1.5 miles to the west of the downtown area of the City and does not have the potential to detrimentally affect the Downtown Business District. The future residents of this project may patronize the downtown area and provide an additional source of revenue to the Downtown Business District.

Issues and Supporting Information Sources:

Potentially
Significant
Impact

Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated

Less Than
Significant
Impact

No
Impact

7. RESIDENTIAL DESIGN.

Would the proposal:

a) Conflict with existing codes and or standards?



__

b) Meet minimum point standards of the Residential
Development Allocation process?



_

Residential Design– Discussion

a) Upon City Council approval of the Density Bonus Agreement accompanying the project, the proposed project will comply with the applicable provisions of the Redlands Municipal Code, including Title 18 (Zoning Regulations) and Title 15 (Buildings and Construction). The proposed project includes residential dwelling units (apartments and condominiums). The buildings are designed with high-quality architecture and building materials. Conditions of approval are included in the project for the plan check process (subsequent to entitlement). No impacts are anticipated in terms of conflicts with existing codes and standards.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
339 of 932
Socio-Economic Cost/Benefit Study
The Venue at Orange Phase 2

b) Due to current State law (SB 330 known as the “Housing Crisis Act of 2019”), residential projects and residential subdivisions are not evaluated by a point system or the standards of the Residential Development Allocation process. SB 330 prohibits annual limits on the number of permits issued for the approval and construction of housing during any one year. City Council Resolution No. 8082 suspended certain provisions of RMC Chapter 19.04 relating to the competitive evaluation of residential development projects as long as the State law remain in effect.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
340 of 932
Socio-Economic Cost/Benefit Study
The Venue at Orange Phase 2

Issues and Supporting Information Sources:

Potentially
Significant
Impact

Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated

Less Than
Significant
Impact

No
Impact

8. CULTURAL FACILITIES.

Would the proposal result in:

a) Impacts to an historic residential structure,
neighborhood, or district?



b) Impacts to an historic commercial structure or
district?



c) Impacts to cultural facilities such as the Smiley
Library, Redlands Bowl, Lincoln Shrine, Joslyn
Center, Community Center, etc?



d) Have the potential to cause a physical change which
would affect unique ethnic cultural values?



e) Potential to disturb existing religious facilities.

f) Impact or restrict religious or sacred uses.




Cultural Facilities – Discussion

a, b) There are no historic residential or commercial structures on the project site, nor is the project site located within a historic neighborhood or district. No impacts are anticipated.

c) The project will ultimately result in the construc tion of 164 apartment units, and would not impact cultural facilities such as the Smiley Library, Redlands Bowl, Lincoln Shrine, Joslyn Center, Community Center, etc. The development will provide revenue to the City through increased property tax assessment generated by the future homes which may assist in the operation of some cultural facilities. Thus, the project will not have an adverse impact to cultural facilities.

d) No part of this project has the potential to affect unique ethnic cultural values. No impacts are anticipated.

e) No part of this project has the potential to affect existing religious facilities. No impacts are anticipated.

f) No religious facilities are located within the project site. The project is located to the north of an existing church, which abuts a portion of the project on the south. The development of the proposed project will not result in impacts to existing religious Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
341 of 932
Socio-Economic Cost/Benefit Study
The Venue at Orange Phase 2

facilities or restrict religious uses. The project’s circulation and operations will not require access to the church property and the project will not inhibit access to the church property. The project will not create any impact in relation to this issue.

The project would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, as defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 ( as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe), and the property is not listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k).

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
342 of 932
Socio-Economic Cost/Benefit Study
The Venue at Orange Phase 2

Issues and Supporting Information Sources:

Potentially
Significant
Impact

Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated

Less Than
Significant
Impact

,

No
Impact

9. PARK FACILITIES & RECREATIONAL PROGRAMS.

Will the proposal result in:

a) Increases in use or demand for park facilities or
programs to include manpower, facilities or
equipment?



b) A ratio of parkland to population which exceeds
standards and or goals established by the General
Plan?



Park Facilities & Recreational Programs – Discussion

a, b) The current standard for the City of Redlands parkland and open recreational space is 5.0 acres per 1,000 residents. The project is expected to generate 431 new residents, which could cause an increase in the use of parkland in Redlands. The closest park to the project site is Heritage Park, located 0.30 mile from the site, followed by Jennie Davis Park, which is approximately 0.96 mile from the site. General Plan buildout would create a demand for 55 acres of new parkland at the standard ratio of 5 acres per 1,000 residents (City of Redlands, 2017e). The project will pay all associated development impact fees in relation to parks. Additionally, the project is part of a development with existing recreational amenities for the residents on site, including a clubhouse with gym, yoga and Pilates studio, and game room, as well as outdoor recreational amenities, including a 1,920-square-foot outdoor swimming pool, an 87-square-foot hot tub, an outdoor fireplace, a walking trail, and an outdoor lounge and BBQ area. These amenities, as well as the payment of development impact fees, could serve to reduce impacts on public recreational amenities. Because the project would be consistent with Redlands General Plan 2035 buildout, development of park facilities would accommodate the anticipated increase in population, and impacts to parks would be less than significant.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
343 of 932
Socio-Economic Cost/Benefit Study
The Venue at Orange Phase 2

Issues and Supporting Information Sources:

Potentially
Significant
Impact

Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated

Less Than
Significant
Impact

No
Impact

10. LAND USE COMPATIBILITY. Would the proposal result in:

a) Land uses that are not compatible or consistent with the General Plan?



b) Economic impacts on businesses and
small property owners from a project

c) Physical separation or division of an
existing community

d) Loss of jobs for the community?

e) Overcrowding of housing?









__

Land Use Compatibility – Discussion

a) The project is located within the Medium Density Residential General Plan land use designation and IS zoned EV/2500 (Multiple Family). The project is proposing to develop with a density of 22.5 units per acre, which is allowable based upon the future approval of a Density Bonus Agreement.

b) The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Designation Medium Density Residential . Ultimately, a total of 164 apartment units will be developed on the site . The design of the project includes a use and density consistent with nearby residential development . There are no commercial or industrial uses proposed which would create an economic impact related to local businesses or small properties. No detrimental economic impacts on businesses or small property owners are anticipated.

c) The project site has existing residential neighborhoods immediately adjacent to the site. The project will be constructed as an infill portion of vacant land within an existing development. The project will continue the trend of multiple- family residential uses along Orange Avenue and in no way will physically divide or separate the existing community. No impacts are anticipated.

d) The proposed project would be consistent with the General Plan Land Use Designation. This type of development is consistent with the residential nature of the surrounding development. The eventual construction of the project will create jobs, Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
344 of 932
Socio-Economic Cost/Benefit Study
The Venue at Orange Phase 2

which will not result in the loss of jobs to the community. No impacts are anticipated.

e) The project does not have the potential to result in overcrowding of the current housing stock within the City. The project will construct up to 164 residential units as a second phase of The Venue at Orange apartments project which is was previously constructed with 328 units. The proposed project will be constructed on a vacant portion of the Venue at Orange apartments. No impacts are anticipated.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
345 of 932
Socio-Economic Cost/Benefit Study
The Venue at Orange Phase 2

Issues and Supporting Information Sources:

Potentially
Significant
Impact

Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated

Less Than
Significant
Impact

No
Impact

11. SCHOOLS. Would the proposal result in:

a) Creating an overcapacity in schools?



b) The need for additional school facilities or
equipment?

c) Land uses not consistent with or
compatible with existing educational
facilities in community?

d) Social or academic impacts on
students resulting from school
closures.







Schools – Discussion

a-d)
The nearest schools to the project site include the Grove School Farm Campus (approximately 106 feet southwest), Barton Road KinderCare (approximately 528 feet south), the Montessori School (approximately 686 feet west), Grove High School (located approximately 686 feet west-northwest), and the Barton House Playschool (approximately 1,267 feet southwest). The project would result in a significant environmental impact if new or physically altered public education facilities would need to be built to maintain acceptable performance objects for public education. The project site is located within the Redlands Unified School District (RUSD). The project would be subject to the school fees in effect at the time of development, as required for all new residential development under Senate Bill

50. Because the project developer will pay all associated development impact fees to offset impacts on schools, impacts to school services are considered less than significant.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
346 of 932
TABLE 1
CITY OF REDLANDS : MODEL
LAND USE SUMMARY:

FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS
YEAR 1 YEAR 2 YEAR 3 YEAR 4 YEAR 5 YEAR 6 YEAR 7 YEAR 8 YEAR 9 YEAR 10 LAND USE 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 TOTAL

RESIDENTIAL UNITS
RURAL LIVING (0.2 - 0.4 du/acre) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
VERY-LOW-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (0 - 2.7 du/acre) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LOW-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (0 - 6.0 du/acre) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 DEVELOPER LOW-MEDIUM-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (0 - 8.0 du/acre) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 MEDIUM-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (0 - 15.0 du/acre) 164 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 164 HIGH DENSITY (0 - 27.0 du/acre) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
TOTAL, RESIDENTIAL UNITS 164 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 164
CUMULATIVE, RESIDENTIAL UNITS 164 164 164 164 164 164 164 164 164 164 NA PROJECT RESIDENTS /1
RURAL LIVING (0.4 - 0.2 du/acre) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
VERY-LOW-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (0 - 2.7 du/acre) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LOW-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (0 - 6.0 du/acre) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LOW-MEDIUM-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (0 - 8.0 du/acre) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 MEDIUM-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (0 - 15.0 du/acre) 459 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 459 HIGH DENSITY (0 - 27 du/acre)
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
TOTAL, PROJECT RESIDENTS 459 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 459
CUMULATIVE, PROJECT RESIDENTS 459 459 459 459 459 459 459 459 459 459 NA CUMULATIVE PROJECT ACREAGE /2
RURAL LIVING (0.4 - 0.2 du/acre) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 NA VERY-LOW-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (0 - 2.7 du/acre) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 NA LOW-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (0 - 6.0 du/acre) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 NA LOW-MEDIUM-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (0 - 8.0 du/acre) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 NA MEDIUM-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (0 - 15.0 du/acre) 524.80 524.80 524.80 524.80 524.80 524.80 524.80 524.80 524.80 524.80 NA HIGH DENSITY (0 - 27 du/acre) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 NA CUMULATIVE, PROJECT ACREAGE 524.80 524.80 524.80 524.80 524.80 524.80 524.80 524.80 524.80 524.80 NA LAND NON-RESIDENTIAL ACRES, ANNUAL /3
RETAIL 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
INDUSTRIAL 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0
OTHER NON-RESIDENTIAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0
ANNUAL TOTAL, NON-RESIDENTIAL 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

LAND NON-RESIDENTIAL ACRES, CUMULATIVE
RETAIL 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 NA
INDUSTRIAL 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 NA
OTHER NON-RESIDENTIAL 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 NA CUMULATIVE TOTAL, NON-RESIDENTIAL 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 NA LAND NON-RESIDENTIAL EDU'S, CUMULATIVE /4
RETAIL 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 NA
INDUSTRIAL 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 NA
OTHER NON-RESIDENTIAL 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 NA CUMULATIVE TOTAL, NON-RESIDENTIAL EDU'S 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 NA BUILDING NON-RESIDENTIAL SQ.FT., ANNUAL
RETAIL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
INDUSTRIAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
OTHER NON-RESIDENTIAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
ANNUAL TOTAL, NON-RESIDENTIAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
BUILDING NON-RESIDENTIAL SQ.FT., CUMULATIVE
RETAIL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA
INDUSTRIAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA
OTHER NON-RESIDENTIAL 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA
CUMULATIVE TOTAL, NON-RESIDENTIAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NA SHADED CELLS ARE VARIABLE ASSUMPTIONS OR INPUTS UNIQUE TO THE PROJECT.

NOTES:

1. Average number of residents per Dwelling Unit ("DU") provided by the California Department of Finance. 3. Assumes average non-residential site coverage of the following (based on the General Plan):

Residents per DU = 2.801 OTHER Retail 0.0%
Industrial 0.0%

2. Assumes residential acreage per unit of the following: Other Non-Residential 0.0% DEVELOPER Rural Living (less than 0.2 - 0.4 du/acre) NA
Very-Low-Density Residential (0 - 2.7 du/acre) N/A
Low-Density Residential (0 - 6.0 du/acre) NA 4. Assumes non-residential equivalent dwelling units of the following:

Low-Medium-Density Residential (0 - 8.0 du/acre) NA DEVELOPER EDUs per acre = 6.0 OTHER Medium-Density Residential (0 - 15.0 du/acre) 3.20
High Density (0 - 27.0 du/acre) NA GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUTPROJ. Sq. Ft.* F.A.R.* Projected Acreage RETAIL 8,646,200 0.30 661.63
INDUSTRIAL 10,048,400 0.40 576.70 OTHER
OTHER NON-RESIDENTIAL 21,641,990 0.45 1,104.07
40,336,590 2,342.40
*As disclosed in the General Plan
Typical Home Size: 2,682 OTHER
Estimated Equivalency: 6.42
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
347 of 932
TABLE 2
CITY OF REDLANDS : MODEL
LAND USE SUMMARY:

FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS

ASSESSED VALUATION ASSUMPTIONS SECURED PROPERTY TAX ASSUMPTIONS RESIDENTIAL NET APPORTIONMENT FACTORS AS A FRACTION OF 1.0% TAX RATE RURAL LIVING ASSESSED VALUE $0
VERY-LOW-DENSITY ASSESSED VALUE $0 PROPERTY TAXES PASSED THROUGH TO CITY /1 20.00% CITY LOW-DENSITY ASSESSED VALUE $0 DEVELOPER
LOW-MEDIUM-DENSITY ASSESSED VALUE $0 1. Based on amount disclosed in the adopted 1998-99 budget.

MEDIUM-DENSITY ASSESSED VALUE $318,828
HIGH DENSITY ASSESSED VALUE $0

NON-RESIDENTIAL UNSECURED PROPERTY TAX ASSUMPTIONS
RETAIL ASSESSED VALUE $0.00
INDUSTRIAL ASSESSED VALUE $0.00 RESIDENTIAL:

OTHER NON-RESIDENTIAL ASSESSED VALUE N/A DEVELOPER UNSECURED TAXES AS A % OF SECURED 2.75% CITY NON-RESIDENTIAL:

UNSECURED TAXES AS A % OF SECURED 10.00%
YEAR 1 YEAR 2 YEAR 3 YEAR 4 YEAR 5 YEAR 6 YEAR 7 YEAR 8 YEAR 9 YEAR 10 FISCAL YEAR ($s x1,000) end of: 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 SECURED ASSESSED VALUE CALCULATION:

ANNUAL ASSESSED VALUES (YEARLY INCREASE)

RESIDENTIAL
RURAL LIVING $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
VERY-LOW-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 LOW-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
LOW-MEDIUM-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 MEDIUM-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL $52,288 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
TOTAL RESIDENTIAL $52,288 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

NON-RESIDENTIAL
RETAIL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
INDUSTRIAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
OTHER NON-RESIDENTIAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
TOTAL NON-RESIDENTIAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
TOTAL YEARLY VALUATION INCREASE: $52,288 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

CUMULATIVE ASSESSED VALUES

RESIDENTIAL
RURAL LIVING $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
VERY-LOW-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 LOW-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
LOW-MEDIUM-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 MEDIUM-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL $52,288 $52,288 $52,288 $52,288 $52,288 $52,288 $52,288 $52,288 $52,288 $52,288 HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
TOTAL RESIDENTIAL $52,288 $52,288 $52,288 $52,288 $52,288 $52,288 $52,288 $52,288 $52,288 $52,288

NON-RESIDENTIAL
RETAIL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
INDUSTRIAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
OTHER NON-RESIDENTIAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
TOTAL NON-RESIDENTIAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
TOTAL CUMULATIVE ASSESSED VALUE $52,288 $52,288 $52,288 $52,288 $52,288 $52,288 $52,288 $52,288 $52,288 $52,288 SECURED PROPERTY TAX REVENUE CALCULATION:

CITY OF REDLANDS
RESIDENTIAL $105 $105 $105 $105 $105 $105 $105 $105 $105 $105 NON-RESIDENTIAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
TOTAL SECURED TAX REVENUES TO CITY $105 $105 $105 $105 $105 $105 $105 $105 $105 $105 UNSECURED PROPERTY TAX REVENUE CALCULATION:

CITY OF REDLANDS
RESIDENTIAL $3 $3 $3 $3 $3 $3 $3 $3 $3 $3
NON-RESIDENTIAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
TOTAL UNSECURED TAX REVENUES TO CITY $3 $3 $3 $3 $3 $3 $3 $3 $3 $3 TOTAL PROPERTY TAXES TO CITY $107 $107 $107 $107 $107 $107 $107 $107 $107 $107 Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
348 of 932
TABLE 3
CITY OF REDLANDS : MODEL
LAND USE SUMMARY:

FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS

RESIDENTIAL INDIRECT SALES TAX GENERATION ASSUMPTIONS BUSINESS DIRECT SALES & USE TAX GENERATION ASSUMPTIONS PROPERTY TRANSFER TAX ASSUMPTIONS AVERAGE HOUSEHOLD INCOME ASSUMPTIONS: SALES TAXES PASSED THROUGH TO CITY, APPLIED TO COSTS: /1 1.00% CITY RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY TURNOVER RATE 10.00% CITY MEASURE 'I' TAXES PASSED THROUGH TO TRANSIT AUTHORITY 0.00% BUS & COM PROPERTY TURNOVER RATE 5.00% WEIGHTED AVERAGE RESIDENTIAL PRICE $318,828 LOCAL TRANSPORTATION SALES TAXES 0.00% TRANSFER TAX AS A % OF RESALE DOLLAR 0.11% AVERAGE RESIDENTIAL MORTGAGE (20% DOWN) $255,062 DISPLACED EXISTING CITY SALES TAX 33.33% PROPERTY TRANSFER TAX PASSED THROUGH TO CITY 50.00% ANNUAL MORTGAGE PAYMENTS @ 6.50% & 30 YEARS $19,346 CITY PROJECT RETAIL TAXABLE SALES PER SQ. FT:

AVG. HOUSEHOLD INCOME (3:1 INCOME/PAYMENT RATIO): $58,038 RETAIL $0.00 RETAIL TAXABLE EXPENDITURE (% OF INCOME): 25.0% INDUSTRIAL $0.00 PROJECT RESIDENTS' PURCHASES OUTSIDE PROJECT 50.0% OTHER NON-RESIDENTIAL 0 AND WITHIN INCORPORATED CITY:

1. Based on amount passed through to city in the adopted 1997-98 budget.

YEAR 1 YEAR 2 YEAR 3 YEAR 4 YEAR 5 YEAR 6 YEAR 7 YEAR 8 YEAR 9 YEAR 10 FISCAL YEAR ($s x1,000) end of: 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 SALES & USE TAX REVENUE CALCULATION (CUMULATIVE):

INDIRECT SALES TAX GENERATION
RESIDENTIAL TAXABLE EXPENDITURES $2,380 $2,380 $2,380 $2,380 $2,380 $2,380 $2,380 $2,380 $2,380 $2,380 TOTAL TAXABLE PURCHASES WITHIN CITY $1,190 $1,190 $1,190 $1,190 $1,190 $1,190 $1,190 $1,190 $1,190 $1,190 RESIDENTIAL SALES TAX GENERATION $12 $12 $12 $12 $12 $12 $12 $12 $12 $12

DIRECT SALES TAX GENERATION
RETAIL TAXABLE SALES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
INDUSTRIAL TAXABLE SALES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
OTHER NON-RESIDENTIAL TAXABLE SALES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 SUB-TOTAL DIRECT TAXABLE SALES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 LESS: DISPLACED EXISTING CITY SALES TAX $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL DIRECT TAXABLE SALES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL DIRECT SALES TAX GENERATION $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL PROJECT SALES & USE TAX REVENUES, APPLIED TO COSTS $12 $12 $12 $12 $12 $12 $12 $12 $12 $12 RESIDENTIAL MEASURE 'I' SALES TAXES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 NON-RESIDENTIAL MEASURE 'I' SALES TAXES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 RESIDENTIAL LOCAL TRANSPORTATION SALES TAXES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 NON-RESIDENTIAL LOCAL TRANSPORTATION SALES TAXES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL PROJECT SALES & USE TAX REVENUES, FOR TRANSPORTATION $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 PROPERTY TRANSFER TAX CALCULATION (CUMULATIVE):

RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY TRANSFER TAXES $2.88 $2.88 $2.88 $2.88 $2.88 $2.88 $2.88 $2.88 $2.88 $2.88 NON-RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY TRANSFER T AXES $0.00
$0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
TOTAL ANNUAL PROPERTY TRANSFER TAXES $3 $3 $3 $3 $3 $3 $3 $3 $3 $3 SHADED CELLS ARE VARIABLE ASSUMPTIONS OR INPUTS UNIQUE TO THE PROJECT.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
349 of 932
TABLE 4
CITY OF REDLANDS : MODEL
LAND USE SUMMARY:

FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS

BUSINESS LICENSE FEE REVENUE FRANCHISE FEES (PER CAPITA) TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAX

RESIDENTIAL NA RESIDENTIAL NON-RESIDENTIAL NUMBER OF AVAILABLE HOTEL ROOMS NON-RESIDENTIAL TOTAL FRANCHISE $16.71 $16.71 OCCUPANCY RATE

BUSINESS LICENSE FEES ARE CHARGED AT A RATE EQUAL AVERAGE BILLING RATE PER ROOM TO $12 FOR THE FIRST $5,000 IN GROSS SALES, PLUS $3 % PASSED THROUGH TO CITY FOR EACH ADDITIONAL $5,000 INCREMENT IN GROSS SALES. AVERAGE YEARLY OCCUPANCY REVENUES TO CITY YEAR 1 YEAR 2 YEAR 3 YEAR 4 YEAR 5 YEAR 6 YEAR 7 YEAR 8 YEAR 9 YEAR 10 FISCAL YEAR ($s x1,000) end of: 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034

BUSINESS LICENSE FEE REVENUE

RESIDENTIAL

RURAL LIVING NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

VERY-LOW-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

LOW-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

LOW-MEDIUM-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

MEDIUM-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

TOTAL RESIDENTIAL NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

NON-RESIDENTIAL
RETAIL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
INDUSTRIAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
OTHER NON-RESIDENTIAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
TOTAL NON-RESIDENTIAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
TOTAL, BUSINESS LICENSE FEE REVENUE $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

FRANCHISE FEE REVENUE
RESIDENTIAL FRANCHISE FEES $7.677 $7.677 $7.677 $7.677 $7.677 $7.677 $7.677 $7.677 $7.677 $7.677 NON-RESIDENTIAL FRANCHISE FEES $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 TOTAL, FRANCHISE FEE REVENUE $8 $8 $8 $8 $8 $8 $8 $8 $8 $8

TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAX REVENUE
TOTAL, TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAX REVENUE $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 SHADED CELLS ARE VARIABLE ASSUMPTIONS OR INPUTS UNIQUE TO THE PROJECT.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
350 of 932
TABLE 5
CITY OF REDLANDS : MODEL

OTHER REVENUE AND REVENUE SUMMARY

FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS
OTHER GENERAL REVENUES (PER CAPITA METHOD) /1 INCOME FROM INVESTMENTS OTHER TAXES /2 $10.86 EFFECTIVE INTEREST 2.50% OTHER
OTHER REVENUES $6.96

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT NA

LIBRARY NA

POLICE DEPARTMENT NA

POLICE - ANIMAL CONTROL NA

POLICE - RECREATION NA

POLICE - SENIOR SERVICES NA

FIRE NA

PUBLIC WORKS NA
SUBTOTAL, OTHER REVENUES PER CAPITA: $17.83

1. See Appendix for calculation of per capita multipliers. For items without values, a net cost technique is being employed.

2. Other Taxes includes Public Safety Sales Tax.

YEAR 1 YEAR 2 YEAR 3 YEAR 4 YEAR 5 YEAR 6 YEAR 7 YEAR 8 YEAR 9 YEAR 10 FISCAL YEAR ($s x1,000) end of: 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034

PER CAPITA REVENUES

OTHER TAXES
RESIDENTIAL $5 $5 $5 $5 $5 $5 $5 $5 $5 $5
NON-RESIDENTIAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
TOTAL, OTHER TAXES $5 $5 $5 $5 $5 $5 $5 $5 $5 $5

OTHER REVENUES
RESIDENTIAL $3 $3 $3 $3 $3 $3 $3 $3 $3 $3
NON-RESIDENTIAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
TOTAL, OTHER LICENSES, PERMITS & FINES $3 $3 $3 $3 $3 $3 $3 $3 $3 $3

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
RESIDENTIAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
NON-RESIDENTIAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
TOTAL, STATE REVENUES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

LIBRARY
RESIDENTIAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
NON-RESIDENTIAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
TOTAL, FEDERAL REVENUES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

POLICE DEPARTMENT
RESIDENTIAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
NON-RESIDENTIAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
TOTAL, CITY ATTORNEY $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

POLICE - ANIMAL CONTROL
RESIDENTIAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
NON-RESIDENTIAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
TOTAL, ENGINEERING SERVICES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

POLICE - RECREATION
RESIDENTIAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
NON-RESIDENTIAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
TOTAL, FIRE DEPARTMENT $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

POLICE - SENIOR SERVICES
RESIDENTIAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
NON-RESIDENTIAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
TOTAL, JOSLYN CENTER $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
FIRE
RESIDENTIAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
NON-RESIDENTIAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
TOTAL, LIBRARY $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

PUBLIC WORKS
RESIDENTIAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
NON-RESIDENTIAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
TOTAL, PARKS $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
TOTAL RESIDENTIAL PER CAPITA REVENUES $8 $8 $8 $8 $8 $8 $8 $8 $8 $8 TOTAL NON-RESIDENTIAL PER CAPITA REVENUES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL PER CAPITA REVENUES $8 $8 $8 $8 $8 $8 $8 $8 $8 $8 TOTAL RESIDENTIAL CASE STUDY REVENUES $130 $130 $130 $130 $130 $130 $130 $130 $130 $130 TOTAL NON-RESIDENTIAL CASE STUDY REVENUES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL CASE STUDY REVENUES $130 $130 $130 $130 $130 $130 $130 $130 $130 $130 RESIDENTIAL REV AVAILABLE FOR INV. INCOME $138 $138 $138 $138 $138 $138 $138 $138 $138 $138 NON-RESIDENTIAL REV AVAILABLE FOR INV. INCOME $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL REVENUES AVAILABLE FOR INVESTMENT INCOME $138 $138 $138 $138 $138 $138 $138 $138 $138 $138 RESIDENTIAL INVESTMENT INCOME $3 $3 $3 $3 $3 $3 $3 $3 $3 $3 NON-RESIDENTIAL INVESTMENT INCOME $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 TOTAL INVESTMENT INCOME $3 $3 $3 $3 $3 $3 $3 $3 $3 $3
SHADED CELLS ARE VARIABLE ASSUMPTIONS OR INPUTS UNIQUE TO THE PROJECT.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
351 of 932
TABLE 6
CITY OF REDLANDS : MODEL

POLICE DEPARTMENT, FIRE DEPARTMENT, PUBLIC WORKS & PER CAPITA COSTS

FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS

POLICE DEPARTMENT COSTS
RESIDENTIAL CALLS 16,562 CITY
COST PER DWELLING UNIT $295
NON-RESIDENTIAL RETAIL CALLS 8,987
COST PER BUILDING SQUARE FOOT $0.47
NON-RESIDENTIAL INDUSTRIAL CALLS 344
COST PER BUILDING SQUARE FOOT $0.02
OTHER NON-RESIDENTIAL CALLS 7,948
COST PER BUILDING SQUARE FOOT $0.42
MISCELLANEOUS CALLS /2 17,628
TOTAL CALLS 51,469

1. Based on Net Cost and number of calls to residential or non-residential properties.

2. Based on conversations with the Police Chief, these incidences are not related to residences or businesses in the City.

EXISTING DWELLING UNITS 25,984 CITY
EXISTING NON-RESIDENTIAL SQUARE FOOTAGE 8,824,690
RESIDENTIAL FIRE DEPARTMENT COSTS [1]
RESIDENTIAL CALLS 3,579 CITY
COST PER DWELLING UNIT $168
NON-RESIDENTIAL RETAIL CALLS 446
COST PER BUILDING SQUARE FOOT $0.06
NON-RESIDENTIAL INDUSTRIAL CALLS 155
COST PER BUILDING SQUARE FOOT $0.02
OTHER NON-RESIDENTIAL CALLS 1,459
COST PER BUILDING SQUARE FOOT $0.20
MISCELLANEOUS CALLS /2 1,988
TOTAL CALLS 7,627

1. Based on Net Cost and number of calls to residential or non-residential properties.

2. Based on information from Fire Chief, these incidences are not related to residences or businesses in the City.

PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE REQUIREMENTS /1 PUBLIC WORKS MAINTENANCE COSTS ROADS (LANE MILES) 0.0 DEVELOPER PAVEMENT MAINTENANCE PER LANE MILE /1 $5,000 CITY TRAFFIC INTERSECTIONS REQUIRING SIGNALS 0.0 STREET SWEEPING PER CURB MILE - ALL STREETS /1 $9 AGGREGATE LANDSCAPING (ACRES) 0.0 TRAFFIC SIGNAL OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE PER INTERSECTION /1 $5,560 PARK ACREAGE (GROSS) 0.0 LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE PER ACRE /1 $12,500 STREET LIGHTS 0.0 PARK MAINTENANCE PER ACRE /1 $7,000
OPEN SPACE (ACRES) 0.0 STREET LIGHT MAINTENANCE COST PER LIGHT /1 $125 TRAILS (LINEAL MILE) 0.0 OPEN SPACE MAINTENANCE PER ACRE /2 $125 STORM DRAINS (MILES) 0.0 TRAIL MAINTENANCE PER LINEAL MILE /2 $500 STORM DRAIN MAINTENANCE PER MILE /2 $750

1. Infrastructure should exclude privately maintained facilities.

1. Based on consultations with the City of Redlands Public Works Department.

2. Based on consultant's experience.

CITY GENERAL GOVERNMENT COSTS* CITY GENERAL GOVERNMENT COSTS CONTINUED CITY COUNCIL $174,090 TOTAL CITY OPERATING BUDGET* $49,046,241 CITY CLERK $285,939
CITY MANAGER $314,819 *Excludes Debt Service, Utilities and Capital Improvements.

FINANCE $605,155
CITY TREASURER $2,875,064 OVERHEAD AS A % OF OPERATING BUDGET 11.04% CITY ATTORNEY $1,159,167
TOTAL, CITY GENERAL GOVERNMENT COSTS $5,414,234 OVERHEAD AS A % OF DIRECT COSTS 12.41% *Costs have been reduced to reflect department specific revenues. OVERHEAD BY DEFINITION CAUSING NO COST 0.00% OVERHEAD AS % OF DIRECT, AVERAGE 6.20%
OTHER NET COSTS (PER CAPITA METHOD) /1
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT $29.49
LIBRARY $28.43

1. See Appendix for calculation of per capita multipliers.

YEAR 1 YEAR 2 YEAR 3 YEAR 4 YEAR 5 YEAR 6 YEAR 7 YEAR 8 YEAR 9 YEAR 10 FISCAL YEAR ($s x1,000) end of: 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034

CITY DIRECT COSTS

POLICE DEPARTMENT COSTS
RESIDENTIAL $48.380 $48.380 $48.380 $48.380 $48.380 $48.380 $48.380 $48.380 $48.380 $48.380 NON-RESIDENTIAL RETAIL $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 NON-RESIDENTIAL INDUSTRIAL $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 OTHER NON-RESIDENTIAL $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 TOTAL, POLICE DEPARTMENT COSTS $48.380 $48.380 $48.380 $48.380 $48.380 $48.380 $48.380 $48.380 $48.380 $48.380

FIRE DEPARTMENT COSTS
RESIDENTIAL $27.583 $27.583 $27.583 $27.583 $27.583 $27.583 $27.583 $27.583 $27.583 $27.583 NON-RESIDENTIAL RETAIL $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 NON-RESIDENTIAL INDUSTRIAL $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 OTHER NON-RESIDENTIAL $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 TOTAL, FIRE DEPARTMENT COSTS $27.583 $27.583 $27.583 $27.583 $27.583 $27.583 $27.583 $27.583 $27.583 $27.583

PUBLIC WORKS COSTS
PAVEMENT MAINTENANCE $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 STREET SWEEPING $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 TRAFFIC SIGNAL OPERATION $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 PARK MAINTENANCE $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 STREET LIGHT MAINTENANCE $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 OPEN SPACE MAINTENANCE $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 TRAIL MAINTENANCE $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 STORM DRAIN MAINTENANCE $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 TOTAL, PUBLIC WORKS COSTS $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
RESIDENTIAL $13.546 $13.546 $13.546 $13.546 $13.546 $13.546 $13.546 $13.546 $13.546 $13.546 NON-RESIDENTIAL $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 TOTAL, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT $13.546 $13.546 $13.546 $13.546 $13.546 $13.546 $13.546 $13.546 $13.546 $13.546

LIBRARY
RESIDENTIAL $13.058 $13.058 $13.058 $13.058 $13.058 $13.058 $13.058 $13.058 $13.058 $13.058 NON-RESIDENTIAL $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 $0.000 TOTAL, LIBRARY $13.058 $13.058 $13.058 $13.058 $13.058 $13.058 $13.058 $13.058 $13.058 $13.058

CITY DIRECT COSTS
RESIDENTIAL $74.984 $74.984 $74.984 $74.984 $74.984 $74.984 $74.984 $74.984 $74.984 $74.984 NON-RESIDENTIAL $48.380 $48.380 $48.380 $48.380 $48.380 $48.380 $48.380 $48.380 $48.380 $48.380 TOTAL, CITY DIRECT COSTS $123.364 $123.364 $123.364 $123.364 $123.364 $123.364 $123.364 $123.364 $123.364 $123.364

CITY GENERAL GOVERNMENT COSTS
RESIDENTIAL $4.652 $4.652 $4.652 $4.652 $4.652 $4.652 $4.652 $4.652 $4.652 $4.652 NON-RESIDENTIAL $3.002 $3.002 $3.002 $3.002 $3.002 $3.002 $3.002 $3.002 $3.002 $3.002 TOTAL, CITY GENERAL GOVERNMENT COSTS $7.654 $7.654 $7.654 $7.654 $7.654 $7.654 $7.654 $7.654 $7.654 $7.654 SHADED CELLS ARE VARIABLE ASSUMPTIONS OR INPUTS UNIQUE TO THE PROJECT.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
352 of 932
TABLE 7
CITY OF REDLANDS : MODEL

FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS DETAILED SUMMARY
YEAR 1 YEAR 2 YEAR 3 YEAR 4 YEAR 5 YEAR 6 YEAR 7 YEAR 8 YEAR 9 YEAR 10 % FISCAL YEAR ($s x1,000) end of: 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 OF TOTAL

ONGOING REVENUES

SECURED PROPERTY TAXES
RESIDENTIAL $105 $105 $105 $105 $105 $105 $105 $105 $105 $105 73.88% NON-RESIDENTIAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00%

UNSECURED PROPERTY TAXES
RESIDENTIAL $3 $3 $3 $3 $3 $3 $3 $3 $3 $3 2.03%
NON-RESIDENTIAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00%

TRANSFER PROPERTY TAXES
RESIDENTIAL $3 $3 $3 $3 $3 $3 $3 $3 $3 $3 2.03%
NON-RESIDENTIAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00%

SALES TAXES
RESIDENTIAL $12 $12 $12 $12 $12 $12 $12 $12 $12 $12 8.41% NON-RESIDENTIAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00%

MEASURE 'I' SALES TAXES
RESIDENTIAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00%
NON-RESIDENTIAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00%

LOCAL TRANSPORTATION SALES TAXES
RESIDENTIAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00%
NON-RESIDENTIAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00%

TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAX
RESIDENTIAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00%
NON-RESIDENTIAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00%

FRANCHISE FEE REVENUES
RESIDENTIAL $8 $8 $8 $8 $8 $8 $8 $8 $8 $8 5.42%
NON-RESIDENTIAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00%

BUSINESS LICENSE REVENUES
RESIDENTIAL NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 0.00%
NON-RESIDENTIAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00%

OTHER TAXES
RESIDENTIAL $5 $5 $5 $5 $5 $5 $5 $5 $5 $5 3.53%
NON-RESIDENTIAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00%

OTHER REVENUES
RESIDENTIAL $3 $3 $3 $3 $3 $3 $3 $3 $3 $3 2.26%
NON-RESIDENTIAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00%

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
RESIDENTIAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00%
NON-RESIDENTIAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00%

LIBRARY
RESIDENTIAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00%
NON-RESIDENTIAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00%

POLICE DEPARTMENT
RESIDENTIAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00%
NON-RESIDENTIAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00%

POLICE - ANIMAL CONTROL
RESIDENTIAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00%
NON-RESIDENTIAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00%

POLICE - RECREATION
RESIDENTIAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00%
NON-RESIDENTIAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00%

POLICE - SENIOR SERVICES
RESIDENTIAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00%
NON-RESIDENTIAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00%
FIRE
RESIDENTIAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00%
NON-RESIDENTIAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00%

PUBLIC WORKS
RESIDENTIAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00%
NON-RESIDENTIAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00%

INVESTMENT INCOME REVENUES
RESIDENTIAL $3 $3 $3 $3 $3 $3 $3 $3 $3 $3 2.44%
NON-RESIDENTIAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00%
TOTAL RESIDENTIAL REVENUES $142 $142 $142 $142 $142 $142 $142 $142 $142 $142 100.00% TOTAL NON-RESIDENTIAL REVENUES $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00% TOTAL ON-GOING REVENUES $142 $142 $142 $142 $142 $142 $142 $142 $142 $142

ONGOING COSTS

POLICE DEPARTMENT COSTS
RESIDENTIAL $48 $48 $48 $48 $48 $48 $48 $48 $48 $48 43.89% NON-RESIDENTIAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00%

FIRE DEPARTMENT COSTS
RESIDENTIAL $28 $28 $28 $28 $28 $28 $28 $28 $28 $28 25.03% NON-RESIDENTIAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00%

PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT COST
RESIDENTIAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00%
NON-RESIDENTIAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00%

GENERAL GOVERNMENT COSTS
RESIDENTIAL $5 $5 $5 $5 $5 $5 $5 $5 $5 $5 4.22%
NON-RESIDENTIAL $3 $3 $3 $3 $3 $3 $3 $3 $3 $3 2.72%

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COSTS
RESIDENTIAL $14 $14 $14 $14 $14 $14 $14 $14 $14 $14 12.29% NON-RESIDENTIAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00%

LIBRARY COSTS
RESIDENTIAL $13 $13 $13 $13 $13 $13 $13 $13 $13 $13 11.85% NON-RESIDENTIAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0.00%
TOTAL RESIDENTIAL COSTS $107 $107 $107 $107 $107 $107 $107 $107 $107 $107 97.28% TOTAL NON-RESIDENTIAL COSTS $3 $3 $3 $3 $3 $3 $3 $3 $3 $3 2.72% TOTAL ON-GOING COSTS $110 $110 $110 $110 $110 $110 $110 $110 $110 $110

ANNUAL RESIDENTIAL ONGOING SURPLUS/(DEFICIT) $34 $34 $34 $34 $34 $34 $34 $34 $34 $34 ANNUAL NON-RESIDENTIAL ONGOING SURPLUS/(DEFICIT) ($3) ($3) ($3) ($3) ($3) ($3) ($3) ($3) ($3) ($3) TOTAL ANNUAL ONGOING SURPLUS/(DEFICIT) $31 $31 $31 $31 $31 $31 $31 $31 $31 $31 ANNUAL RESIDENTIAL REVENUE/COST RATIO 1.32 1.32 1.32 1.32 1.32 1.32 1.32 1.32 1.32 1.32 ANNUAL NON-RESIDENTIAL REVENUE/COST RATIO 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 TOTAL ANNUAL REVENUE/COST RATIO 1.28 1.28 1.28 1.28 1.28 1.28 1.28 1.28 1.28 1.28 Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
353 of 932
TABLE 8a
LAND USE SUMMARY:

FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS SUMMARY (Residential Only))
YEAR 1 YEAR 2 YEAR 3 YEAR 4 YEAR 5 YEAR 6 YEAR 7 YEAR 8 YEAR 9 YEAR 10 FISCAL YEAR ($s x1,000) end of: 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034

ONGOING REVENUES
TOTAL RESIDENTIAL REVENUES $141.5424 $141.5424 $141.5424 $141.5424 $141.5424 $141.5424 $141.5424 $141.5424 $141.5424 $141.5424

ONGOING COSTS
TOTAL RESIDENTIAL COSTS $107.2191 $107.2191 $107.2191 $107.2191 $107.2191 $107.2191 $107.2191 $107.2191 $107.2191 $107.2191 ANNUAL RESIDENTIAL ONGOING SURPLUS/(DEFICIT) $34.3232 $34.3232 $34.3232 $34.3232 $34.3232 $34.3232 $34.3232 $34.3232 $34.3232 $34.3232 ANNUAL RESIDENTIAL REVENUE/COST RATIO 1.32 1.32 1.32 1.32 1.32 1.32 1.32 1.32 1.32 1.32 Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
354 of 932
TABLE 8b
LAND USE SUMMARY:

FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS SUMMARY (Commercial Only)
YEAR 1 YEAR 2 YEAR 3 YEAR 4 YEAR 5 YEAR 6 YEAR 7 YEAR 8 YEAR 9 YEAR 10 FISCAL YEAR ($s x1,000) end of: 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034

ONGOING REVENUES
TOTAL NON-RESIDENTIAL REVENUES $0.0000 $0.0000 $0.0000 $0.0000 $0.0000 $0.0000 $0.0000 $0.0000 $0.0000 $0.0000

ONGOING COSTS
TOTAL NON-RESIDENTIAL COSTS $3.0017 $3.0017 $3.0017 $3.0017 $3.0017 $3.0017 $3.0017 $3.0017 $3.0017 $3.0017 ANNUAL NON-RESIDENTIAL ONGOING SURPLUS/(DEFICIT) ($3.0017) ($3.0017) ($3.0017) ($3.0017) ($3.0017) ($3.0017) ($3.0017) ($3.0017) ($3.0017) ($3.0017) ANNUAL NON-RESIDENTIAL REVENUE/COST RATIO 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
355 of 932
TABLE 8c
CITY OF REDLANDS : MODEL

FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS SUMMARY (MIXED)
YEAR 1 YEAR 2 YEAR 3 YEAR 4 YEAR 5 YEAR 6 YEAR 7 YEAR 8 YEAR 9 YEAR 10 % FISCAL YEAR ($s x1,000) end of: 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 OF TOTAL

ONGOING REVENUES
TOTAL RESIDENTIAL REVENUES $141.5424 $141.5424 $141.5424 $141.5424 $141.5424 $141.5424 $141.5424 $141.5424 $141.5424 $141.5424 100.00% TOTAL NON-RESIDENTIAL REVENUES $0.0000 $0.0000 $0.0000 $0.0000 $0.0000 $0.0000 $0.0000 $0.0000 $0.0000 $0.0000 0.00% TOTAL ON-GOING REVENUES $141.5424 $141.5424 $141.5424 $141.5424 $141.5424 $141.5424 $141.5424 $141.5424 $141.5424 $141.5424

ONGOING COSTS
TOTAL RESIDENTIAL COSTS $107.2191 $107.2191 $107.2191 $107.2191 $107.2191 $107.2191 $107.2191 $107.2191 $107.2191 $107.2191 97.28%

TOTAL NON-RESIDENTIAL COSTS
$3.0017 $3.0017 $3.0017 $3.0017 $3.0017 $3.0017 $3.0017 $3.0017 $3.0017 $3.0017 2.72% TOTAL ON-GOING COSTS $110.2209 $110.2209 $110.2209 $110.2209 $110.2209 $110.2209 $110.2209 $110.2209 $110.2209 $110.2209 ANNUAL RESIDENTIAL ONGOING SURPLUS/(DEFICIT) $34.3232 $34.3232 $34.3232 $34.3232 $34.3232 $34.3232 $34.3232 $34.3232 $34.3232 $34.3232 ANNUAL NON-RESIDENTIAL ONGOING SURPLUS/(DEFICIT) ($3.0017) ($3.0017) ($3.0017) ($3.0017) ($3.0017) ($3.0017) ($3.0017) ($3.0017) ($3.0017) ($3.0017) TOTAL ANNUAL ONGOING SURPLUS/(DEFICIT) $31.3215 $31.3215 $31.3215 $31.3215 $31.3215 $31.3215 $31.3215 $31.3215 $31.3215 $31.3215 ANNUAL RESIDENTIAL REVENUE/COST RATIO 1.32 1.32 1.32 1.32 1.32 1.32 1.32 1.32 1.32 1.32 ANNUAL NON-RESIDENTIAL REVENUE/COST RATIO 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 TOTAL ANNUAL REVENUE/COST RATIO 1.28 1.28 1.28 1.28 1.28 1.28 1.28 1.28 1.28 1.28 Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
356 of 932
TABLE 9
CITY OF REDLANDS : MODEL
SCHOOL FEE MITIGATION (SB 50)

FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL Capacity Acreage SBE 50 fees
SFD 0.2260 SCHOOL DIST Elementary 600 10 $5,200
MFA 0.1362 Middle School 1000 20 $5,500
DEVELOPER FEE REVENUE PER SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED UNIT /1 $3,113 Mobile Home 0.1068 High School 2200 50 $7,200 DEVELOPER FEE REVENUE PER MULTI-FAMILY ATTACHED UNIT /2 $1,431 MIDDLE SCHOOL DEVELOPER FEE REVENUE PER MOBILE HOME /3 $1,212 SFD 0.1310 MFA 0.0574
Mobile Home 0.0548

HIGH SCHOOL
SFD 0.1690
MFA 0.0565
Mobile Home 0.0493
YEAR 1 YEAR 2 YEAR 3 YEAR 4 YEAR 5 YEAR 6 YEAR 7 YEAR 8 YEAR 9 YEAR 10 TOTAL FISCAL YEAR ($s ×1,000) end of: 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034

CITY OF REDLANDS

ANNUAL PROJECTED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
SFD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 DEVELOPER
MFA 328 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 328
Mobile Home 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

STUDENT PROJECTIONS

ELEMENTARY
SFD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
MFA 44.6736 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 45
Mobile Home 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

MIDDLE SCHOOL
SFD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
MFA 18.8272 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19
Mobile Home 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

HIGH SCHOOL
SFD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
MFA 18.532 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19
Mobile Home 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

ANNUAL SCHOOL FEE MITIGATION

ELEMENTARY
SFD $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
MFA $232,303 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Mobile Home $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Total $232,303

MIDDLE SCHOOL
SFD $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
MFA $103,550 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Mobile Home $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Total $103,550

HIGH SCHOOL
SFD $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
MFA $133,430 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Mobile Home $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Total $133,430

TOTAL SCHOOL FEE MITIGATION
SFD $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
MFA $469,283 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $469,283
Mobile Home $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
TOTAL $469,283 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

STUDENT GENERATION FACTORS

RESIDENTIAL SCHOOL FEE MITIGATION
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
357 of 932

THE VENUE AT ORANGE
PROJECT PHASE 2
Exemption Checklist
June 2024
Lead Agency:

City of Redlands
35 Cajon Street #200
Redlands, CA 92373
Project Applicant:

Miller Architectural Corporation
2358 University Ave. #33
San Diego, CA 92104
333
3 Michelson Drive, Suite 500
Irvine, California 92612
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
358 of 932
The Venue at Orange Project Phase 2
Class 32 CEQA Exemption Checklist
City of Redlands i
This page intentionally left blank.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
359 of 932
The Venue at Orange Project Phase 2
Class 32 CEQA Exemption Checklist
City of Redlands ii
Table of Contents
1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................................ 4

1.1 PURPOSE OF NOTICE OF EXEMPTION ...................................................................................................... 4

1.2 DOCUMENT ORGANIZATION ..................................................................................................................... 4 2 PROJECT SETTING .................................................................................................................................................... 6

2.1 PROJECT LOCATION ..................................................................................................................................... 6

2.2 EXISTING PROJECT SITE ................................................................................................................................ 6

2.3 EXISTING LAND USES AND REGULATORY SETTING OF THE PROJECT SITE ..................................... 6

2.4 SURROUNDING LAND USES ........................................................................................................................ 6 3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ........................................................................................................................................ 18

3.1 PROJECT OVERVIEW .................................................................................................................................. 18

3.2 PROJECT FEATURES .................................................................................................................................... 18

3.3 GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING ................................................................................................................ 18

3.4 CONSTRUCTION ......................................................................................................................................... 20

3.1 DISCRETIONARY APPROVALS AND PERMITS ........................................................................................ 20 5 CLASS 32 INFILL EXEMPTION REQUIREMENTS ..................................................................................................... 36

5.1 PROPOSED PROJECT CEQA EXEMPTION ........................................................................................................... 36

5.2 EXCEPTIONS FOR EXEMPTIONS ........................................................................................................................... 51 4 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................................................ 53

Figures
Figure 1: Regional Location .............................................................................................................................................. 8 Figure 2: Local Vicinity ................................................................................................................................................... 10 Figure 3: Project Aerial .................................................................................................................................................. 12 Figure 4: Existing General Plan Designation ............................................................................................................. 14 Figure 6: Conceptual Site Plan ..................................................................................................................................... 22 Figure 7A-1: Elevations .................................................................................................................................................. 24 Figure 7A-2: Elevations .................................................................................................................................................. 26 Figure 7B-1: Elevations ................................................................................................................................................... 28 Figure 7B-2: Elevations ................................................................................................................................................... 30 Figure 7C-1: Elevations .................................................................................................................................................. 32 Figure 8: Conceptual Landscape Plan ......................................................................................................................... 34

Tables
Table 1: Surrounding Existing Land Use and Zoning Designations ........................................................................... 6 Table 2: Proposed Building Development Summary ................................................................................................ 18 Table 3: Proposed Residential Unit Development Summary .................................................................................. 18 Table 4. Proposed Drainage Features ........................................................................................................................ 20 Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
360 of 932
The Venue at Orange Project Phase 2
Class 32 CEQA Exemption Checklist
City of Redlands iii
Table 5: Construction Schedule ..................................................................................................................................... 21 Table 6: EV2500RM Development Standards .......................................................................................................... 37 Table 7: Project Trip Generation ................................................................................................................................. 39 Table 8: Municipal Code Exterior Permitted Noise Levels ...................................................................................... 41 Table 9: Construction Reference Noise Levels ........................................................................................................... 42 Table 10: Construction Equipment Noise Levels at the Nearest Sensitive Receptors ......................................... 43 Table 11: Existing With Project Traffic Noise Level Increases ............................................................................... 44 Table 12: Exterior Noise Level ..................................................................................................................................... 44 Table 13: Proposed Townhomes Exterior to Interior Noise Reduction Rates ....................................................... 45 Table 14: Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment at 25 Feet ......................................................... 46 Table 15: Regional Construction Emissions ................................................................................................................. 47 Table 16: Regional Operational Emissions ................................................................................................................. 48 Table 17: Localized Construction Emissions ................................................................................................................ 48 Table 18: Project Total GHG Emissions....................................................................................................................... 49

Appendices
A. Trip Generation and VMT Screening Analysis
B. Noise Impact Analysis
C. Air Quality, Energy, and Greenhouse Gas Impact Analysis D. Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan
E. Preliminary Drainage Report
F. Cultural Resources Assessment

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
361 of 932
The Venue at Orange Project Phase 2
Class 32 CEQA Exemption Checklist
City of Redlands 4
1 INTRODUCTION
The Applicant for the Venue at Orange Project Phase 2 (proposed Project) is requesting approval from the City of Redlands to develop a 3.3-acre site within the city with three four-story residential buildings for a total of 164 dwelling units . The City of Redlands is the Lead Agency for the p roposed Project. The Lead Agency will utilize this document as evidence that the proposed Project qualifies for the Class 32 Infill Development Projects Exemption, which is further described below.

1.1 PURPOSE OF NOTICE OF EXEMPTION
Article 19 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines includes, as required by Public Resources Code Section 21084, a list of classes of projects which have been determined not to have a significant effect on the environment. This document demonstrates that the proposed Project qualifies for a CEQA Exemption as an Infill Development Project (Class 32 Exemption), consistent with the provisions of CEQA Guidelines Sections 15332 and 15300.2 and provides information for City decision -makers to find that the proposed Project is exempt under CEQA.

Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 , the proposed Project qualifies for a Class 32 Exemption because it is: (1) consistent with the General Plan designation and policies and zoning regulations; (2) is located within the City limits, surrounded by urban uses and is less than 5 acres in size; (3) has no value for endangered, rare or threatened species; (4) would not result in any significant effects related to traffic, noise, air quality or water quality; and (5) can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services. Additionally, this document demonstrates that the proposed Project and its circumstances would not result in any exceptions identified in CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2.

Existing Plans, Programs, or Policies (PPPs) and Project Design Features (PDFs) Throughout the analysis of this document , reference is made to requirements that are applied to all development on the basis of federal, state, or local law. Existing Plans, Programs, or Policies are collectively identified in this document as PPPs. Where applicable, PPPs are listed to show thei r effect in reducing potential environmental impacts. The proposed Project incorporates various measures that serve to reduce potentially significant impacts. These measures are referred to as Project Design Features (PDFs) and are listed below.

1.2 DOCUMENT ORGANIZATION
This Class 32 Exemption Checklist includes the following sections:

Section 1. Introduction
Provides information about CEQA , its requirements for environmental review , and explains the Exemption Checklist that evaluates the potential impacts of the proposed Project to the physical environment.

Section 2. Project Setting
Provides information about the proposed Project’s location, the Project site, and background.

Section 3. Project Description
Includes a description of the proposed Project ’s physical features and construction and operational characteristics.

Section 4. Discretionary Ap provals
Describes anticipated approvals and permits needed for implementation of the proposed Project.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
362 of 932
The Venue at Orange Project Phase 2
Class 32 CEQA Exemption Checklist
City of Redlands 5
Section 5. Class 32 Infill Exemption Requirements
Includes the Exemption Checklist and evaluates the proposed Project’s potential to result in significant adverse effects to the physical environment.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
363 of 932
The Venue at Orange Project Phase 2
Class 32 CEQA Exemption Checklist
City of Redlands 6
2 PROJECT SETTING

2.1 PROJECT LOCATION
The 3.3-acre Project site is located in the western portion of the City of Redlands , in the County of San Bernardino, at 1600 Orange Avenue. The site is located within Township 1 South, Range 3 West, San Bernadino Base and Meridian as shown on the Redlands, California 7.5-minute U.S. Geologic Survey (USGS) topographic map. Regional access to the Project site is provided by Interstate 10 (I-10) and Interstate 210 (I-210). The regional location of the Project site is shown in Figure 1, Regional Location.

The Project site is comprised of a portion of one parcel identified by Assessor’s Parcel Numbers (APN): 0292- 48-201. The Project site is bounded by single family residences to the west, a vacant lot to the south, single- family residences to the east, and multi -family residences to the north. Local access to the Project site is provided by Alabama Street and Orange Avenue. The Project vicinity and surrounding area is shown in Figure 2, Local Vicinity.

2.2 EXISTING PROJECT SITE
The Project site is comprised of one p arcel encompassing approximately 3. 3 acres of land. The site is generally flat with elevations ranging from approximately 1,215 to 1,240 feet above mean sea level. The Project site is currently vacant and heavily disturbed from grading activities associated with the residential development to the north. Multiple ornamental trees exist along the southern portion of the Project site.

Existing conditions of the Project site and adjacent uses are shown in Figure 3, Project Aerial.

2.3 EXISTING LAND USES AND REGULATORY SETTING OF THE PROJECT SITE The Project site has a City of Redlands General Plan land use designation of Medium Density Residential, which allows for densities of up to 15 units per acre, as shown on Figure 4, Existing General Plan Designation.

The Medium Density Residential designation is intended for attached, detached, and/or mixed residential uses with a range of densities and housing types. These housing types may include detached single-family dwellings with one or more dwellings per lot, two-family attached dwellings, and multi-family (three or more) attached dwellings.

The Project site is also within the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan and is zoned as Multiple Family Residential-2500 District (EV2500RM), as shown on Figure 5, Existing Zoning. This zoning district allows up to 15 dwelling units per acre. Allowed uses include multiple-family dwellings as one structure or a group of structures. No groups of single -family detached dwelling units are allowed. In addition, agriculture as a continuation of the existing land use is permitted.

2.4 SURROUNDING LAND USES
The Project site is located within a developing area within the City of Redlands as described in Table 1 below:

Table 1: Surrounding Existing Land Use and Zoning Designations Existing Land Use General Plan Designation
North Multi-Family Residences Medium Density Residential East Single Family Residences Office
South Vacant land Office
West Single Family Residences Medium Density Residential

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
364 of 932
The Venue at Orange Project Phase 2
Class 32 CEQA Exemption Checklist
City of Redlands 7
This page intentionally left blank.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
365 of 932
Figure 1
The Venue at Orange Project Phase 2
City of Redlands
Regional Location
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
366 of 932
The Venue at Orange Project Phase 2
Class 32 CEQA Exemption Checklist
City of Redlands 9
This page was intentionally left blank.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
367 of 932
Local Vicinity
Figure 2
The Venue at Orange Project Phase 2
City of Redlands
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
368 of 932
The Venue at Orange Project Phase 2
Class 32 CEQA Exemption Checklist
City of Redlands 11
This page was intentionally left blank.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
369 of 932
Project Aerial
Figure 3
The Venue at Orange Project Phase 2
City of Redlands
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
370 of 932
The V enue at Orange Project Phase 2
Class 32 CEQA Exemption Checklist
City of Redlands 13
This page was intentionally left blank.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
371 of 932
Existing General Plan Designation
Figure 4
City of Redlands Zoning
Loma Linda University, City of Redlands, County of Riverside, San Bernardino County, Bureau of Land Management, Esri, HERE, Garmin, INCREMENT P, USGS, EPA, USDA, City of Redlands
August 3, 2023
0 0.06 0.120.03 mi
0 0.1 0.190.05 km
1:4,301
tresh
Project Site
Medium Density Residential
Office
Parks/Golf Courses
High Density Residential
The Venue at Orange Project Phase 2
City of Redlands
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
372 of 932
The V enue at Orange Project Phase 2
Class 32 CEQA Exemption Checklist
City of Redlands 15
This page intentionally left blank.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
373 of 932
Existing Zoning
Figure 5
City of Redlands Zoning
Loma Linda University, City of Redlands, County of Riverside, San Bernardino County, Bureau of Land Management, Esri, HERE, Garmin,

INCREMENT P, USGS, EPA, USDA
August 3, 2023
0 0.06 0.120.03 mi
0 0.1 0.190.05 km
1:4,301
tresh
Project Site
EV2500RM - Multiple Family Residential -2500 District
SP57 - Specific Plan 57
EV/AP - Administrative Professional District
The Venue at Orange Project Phase 2
City of Redlands
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
374 of 932
The V enue at Orange Project Phase 2
Class 32 CEQA Exemption Checklist
City of Redlands 17
This page intentionally left blank.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
375 of 932
The V enue at Orange Project Phase 2
Class 32 CEQA Exemption Checklist
City of Redlands 18
3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

3.1 PROJECT OVERVIEW
The proposed Project is within the site boundary of the previously approved Orange Avenue Luxury Apartments Project, State Clearinghouse Number 2019069016 (Approved Project). The Approved Project, which has been constructed to the north of the proposed Project, includes the development of 328 dwelling units on a 21.84-acre site. Under the Approved Project, the Project site was proposed to be developed with open space. The Project Applicant is seeking to develop the Project site, which consists of a 3.3-acre portion of the Approved Project site, with three four -story apartment buildings inclusive of 164 dwelling units. The proposed Project would restrict a total of 50 units (15 percent of the unit count of the Approved Project) within the Approved Project site for low-income affordable housing in exchange for the approval of a density bonus. The density bonus would allow for the construction of the proposed Project, which is equivalent to 50 percent of the Approved Project’s total unit count. Thus, the proposed Project and Approved Project would total 492 units, resulting in a density of approximately 22. 5 dwelling units per acre. The proposed Project also requires approval of a parcel map and commission review and approval. Figure 6, Conceptual Site Plan illustrates the Project as proposed.

3.2 PROJECT FEATURES
Development Summary
The proposed Project would develop the 3.3-acre site with three four-story buildings referred to as S3, S4, and S5. A total of 164 dwelling units would be constructed. Table 2 below summarizes the development characteristics of each building. The proposed Project would provide a total building footprint of 52,325 square feet (SF) which would result in a lot coverage of 36.2 percent. The approximate separation distance between each building would be as follows: 31 feet between S3 and S4, 71 feet between S4 and S5, and 80 feet between S3 and S5.

Approximate building setbacks would be as follows: 94 feet between the eastern property line and S3, 56 feet between the eastern property line and S5, 25 feet between the western property line and S4, and

29.5 feet between the western property line and S5.

Table 2: Proposed Building Development Summary
Footprint (SF) Total SF Units/Floor Total Units
Building S3 25,838 103,352 21 84
Building S4 7,665 30,660 5 20
Building S5 15,597 62,383 15 60
Four
different residential plan options would be provided within the proposed Project. The proposed Project would provide 80 1-bedroom units and 84 2-bedroom units. The residential units would range in size from 674 SF to 1,158 SF. Table 3 below provides a summary of the proposed residential units.

Table 3: Proposed Residential Unit Development Summary
Unit Type #(Bed) + #(Bath) Square Footage Number of Units Satsuma 1+1 674 80
Valencia 2+2 Corner 1,158 4
Valencia 2+2 Standard 1,045 80
Total - 164
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
376 of 932
The Venue at Orange Project Phase 2
Class 32 CEQA Exemption Checklist
City of Redlands 19
Architectural Design
The proposed four-story residences would be designed in Spanish style architecture with multi-level rooflines and a white and brown color scheme. The residences would incorporate stucco finishes, decorative corbels and railings, tiled roofs, stucco -finished trim, and archways in the exterior design. The tallest roof of the proposed residences would be approximately 51 feet, 9 inches in height. Building elevations are shown in Figures 7A-1 through 7C-1.

Recreation and Open Space
The proposed Project would include approximately 26,709 SF of common open space that would be provided in an open space recreational area on the site. The central community open space area would include a pool, hot tub, picnic tables, grills, and outdoor seating.

In addition, the proposed Project would include a total of 4,800 SF of private outdoor patio space and a total of 12,300 SF of private outdoor balcony space. Each ground floor patio would have a minimum of 150 SF of open space. The proposed Project would provide 43,809 SF of combined common and private outdoor living space.

Lighting
Outdoor lighting included as part of future development on the Project site would consist of LED light poles and LED bollards along the perimeter of the building and walkways, and within parking areas.

Access and Circulation
Reciprocal access to the Project site would be provided via one 33 -feet and 3/8-inch-wide driveway on Orange Avenue, through the Approved Project site. A 30 foot -wide to 33 -feet and 3/8 -inch-wide drive aisle would provide internal circulation throughout the Project site and access to on-site parking. Pedestrian sidewalks would be installed to circulate the site and connect to the existing right of way along Orange Avenue.

Parking
The Project proposes a total of 1 32 automobile parking spaces, inclusive of 8 ADA accessible spaces, 6 electric vehicle (EV) charging and parking spaces, and 2 ADA EV parking spaces.

Landscaping
The Project proposes 43,106 SF of landscaping, which would cover approximately 30 percent of the site.

The landscaping would consist of drought tolerant ornamental trees, shrubs, and groundcovers, primarily planted along the perimeter of the property and buildings. Figure 8, Conceptual Landscape Plan, illustrates the proposed landscaping.

Fences and Walls
The Project proposes to construct a 6-foot-high CMU wall along the southern and eastern perimeters of the site. The southern wall would be constructed to the north of the Zanja channel. A 6-foot-high CMU wall would also be constructed at the southwestern portion of the site, connecting to the existing 6-foot-high wall along the western boundary. Re
Infrastructure Improvements
Water
The proposed Project would install 4-inch onsite potable water lines and 10-inch onsite fire service lines that would connect to the existing 12-inch water mains within Orange Avenue and Alabama Street.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
377 of 932
The V enue at Orange Project Phase 2
Class 32 CEQA Exemption Checklist
City of Redlands 20
Sewer
The proposed Project would install 8-inch onsite sewer lines with 6-inch service lines that would connect to the existing 8-inch sewer main in Orange Avenue.

Drainage
The Project site would consist of three drainage management areas (DA -1 through DA -3). The proposed Project would install a total of six, 60 -inch-diameter HDPE pipe infiltration basins at the northern, eastern, and southern portions of the property. DA-1 and DA-2 would each install three underground pipe infiltration basins. The basins would connect to the storm drains constructed by the Approved Project, referred to as Outlet 1 (24-inch to 30-inch) and Outlet 2 (24-inch). The basins within DA-1 would connect to Outlet 1, while the basins within DA-2 would connect to Outlet 2. Both Outlets would convey runoff to the existing 36 -inch storm drain within Orange Avenue, which in turn flows to the existing 48-inch storm drain in Iowa Street. DA- 3 would be left undeveloped, and runoff would be self -treated. A new 18 -inch storm drain would be constructed along the western boundary of the site to convey flows from DA -3 to Outlet 2. Table 4 below summarizes the properties of the proposed drainage features.

Table 4. Proposed Drainage Features
BMP Type Storage Capacity
(cubic feet)
DA-1
Infiltration Basin 1,395
Infiltration Basin 1,018
Infiltration Basin 1,386
DA-2
Infiltration Basin 1,264
Underground
Infiltration Chamber
1,481
Underground
Infiltration Chamber
2,392
DA-3
Self-Treating -

3.3 GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING
The Project site has a City of Redlands General Plan land use designation of Medium Density Residential, which allows for densities of up to 15 units per acre. The Project site is also within the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan and is zoned as Multiple Family Residential- 2500 District (EV2500 RM). This zoning district allows up to 15 dwelling units per acre. The Applicant requested a density bonus consistent with State law for affordable housing. Approval of the density bonus would allow the Approved Project and proposed Project to exceed the allowed site density as described above. State law allows the City to approve an increase in density for affordable housing projects without requiring approval of a general plan amendment or zone change. With approval of the density bonus, the proposed Project would be consistent with the existing General Plan land use designation and zoning district.

3.4 CONSTRUCTION
Construction activities for the proposed Project would last approximately 20 months and in the following stages: (1) grading and excavation; (2) site preparation, which includes trenching for the new utilities and services; (3) building construction; and (4) landscape installation, paving, and ap plication of architectural coatings. Project grading is anticipated to include approximately 22,000 cubic yards of excavation and 7,000 cubic yards of fill. An estimated 15,000 cubic yards of soil would be exported.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
378 of 932
The V enue at Orange Project Phase 2
Class 32 CEQA Exemption Checklist
City of Redlands 21
Construction is anticipated to begin in the fourth quarter of 2024. The proposed Project would open in 2025.

Construction activities would be limited to the hours between 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m., excluding Sundays and holidays, as pursuant to the City’s Municipal Code Section 8.06.090.

Table 5: Construction Schedule
Construction Phase Work Days
Grading 9
Building Construction 394
Paving 18
Architectural Coating 18

3.5 DISCRETIONARY APPROVALS AND PERMITS
The following discretionary approval and permits are anticipated from the City of Redlands to be necessary for implementation of the proposed Project:
• Parcel Map
• Density Bonus Agreement
• Commission Review and Approval No. 914 Revision No. 1 • Socio-Economic Cost Benefit Study
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
379 of 932
Conceptual Site Plan
Figure 6
0"

DOUBLE CHECK

DETECTOR ASSEMBLY
BICYCLE PARKING REQUIREMENTS:

BICYCLE PARKINGSHALL BE PROVIDED PER C.E.C 5.106.4.1
NO REQUIRED BICYCLE PARKING.

ELECTRIC VEHICLE SPACES
PER CEC 5.106.3
WHEN MULTIPLE CHARGING SPACES ARE REQUIRED PER TABLE 5.106.3.3 RACEWAY(S)

IS/ARE REQUIRED TO BE INSTALLED AT THE TIME OF CONSTRUCTION AND SHALL BE INSTALLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THECALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL CODE.

MINIMUM DIMENSIONS OF AN EV CHARGING STATION SHALL BE 18 FEET IN LENGTH AND 9 FEET IN WIDTH. ONE IN EVERY 25 EV SPACES, BUT NOT LESS THAN ONE EV SPACE, SHALL HAVE AN 8 FOOT WIDE MINIMUM ACCESS ISLE. A 5 FOOT WIDE MINIMUM AISLE SHALL BE PERMITTED PROVIDED THE MINIMUM WIDTH OF THE EV SPACE IS 12 FEET.

THESE EV SPACES SHALL HAVE A MAXIMUM SLOPE OF 2 PERCENT IN ANY DIRECTION. 5 EV SPACES REQUIRED
CONCRETE PAVING- PATTERN 01
TROWELED CONTROL JOINT EVERY 5'-0" TYP.

BROOM FINISH, DAVIS COLOR 860 "PEWTER". PROVIDE

SAMPLE FOR APPROVAL PRIOR TO INSTALLATION
CONCRETE PAVING- PATTERN 02
TROWELED EXPANSION JOINTS EVERY 4'-0" TYP.

SWIRL FINISH, DAVIS COLOR 860 "PEWTER"

ASPHALT PAVING

CONCRETE PAVING, NATURAL GRAY TROWELED
EXPANSION JOINTS EVERY 5'-0" TROWEL FINISH.

PLANTING / LANDSCAPING
FLATWORK LEGEND:

CONCRETE PAVING PATTERN 03- STAMPED
CONCRETE IN "HERRINGBONE BRICK PATTERN,
DAVIS COLOR MESQUITE 677- PROVIDE SAMPLE

FOR APPROVAL PRIOR TO INSTALLATION
NOTES:

1. COORDINATE WITH CIVIL DRAWINGS FOR HORIZONTAL CONTROL

2. ALL CONCRETE TO BE NATURAL GRAY U.N.O

3. NON-MONOLITHIC CONCRETE POUR TO BE DOWELED AT 24" O.C, MIN 12" EMBEDDMENT , CENTER IN CONCRETE SECTION, MIN 3" COVERAGE IN

ANY DIRECTION

4. ALL COLORED CONCRETE TO BE INTEGRAL COLOR PER MANUF.

STANDARDS

5. CONCRETE IN DRIVE ISLES TO BE 6" MIN THICKNESS.

DECOMPOSED GRANITE
6-CAR CARPORT
4-CAR CARPORT

ACCESSIBLE PATH OF TRAVEL

PERIMETER FENCE

FIRE RISER ROOM

EV ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING STALL
DESIGNATION.

LED LIGHT POLE, 16'-0" HIGH. REFER

TO ELECTRICAL DRAWINGS
LED BOLLARD, 3'-6" HIGH. REFER TO

ELECTRICAL DRAWINGS
COMPACT PARKING PER 18.164.260 &
EV4.0205U

FIRE CURB ACCESS
PROJECT NAME: LUXVIEW APARTMENTS PHASE II
PROPERTY ADDRESS: 1600 ORANGE AVE, REDLANDS CA 92373
APN NUMBER: 0292-48-201, 0292-72-101, 0292-72-102
ZONE: EV2500-MULTI FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
ZONING DISTRICT : REFER TO MUNICIPAL CODE ZONE
LAND USE TYPE: MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION : VB -APARTMENTS, IIB -OPEN PARKING GARAGE GROSS LOT AREA: 825,026.40 SQ. FT.

DEDICATIONS: 12,049 SQ. FT.

NET LOT AREA: 812,977 SQ. FT.

EXISTING USES: VACANT LOT
EASEMENTS:

FRONT SETBACK: 35 FT
STREET SIDE SETBACK: 35 FT
SIDE YARD SETBACK: 25 FT
REAR YARD SETBACK: 25 FT
DENSITY OF DEVELOPMENT: 2,500 SQ. FT. OF LOT AREA PER DWELLING UNIT MAXIMUM COVERAGE: 45% OF LOT AREA
BUILDING FOOTPRINT: 52,325 SQ. FT.

ZONING BUILDING HEIGHT : NOT GREATER THAN 4 STORIES
ZONING NO. OF STORIES : NOT GREATER THAN 4 STORIES
GROSS BUILDING AREA S3: 103,352 SQ. FT.

GROSS BUILDING AREA S4: 30,660 SQ. FT.

GROSS BUILDING AREA S5: 75,288 SQ. FT.

GROSS BUILDING AREA: 209,300 SQ. FT.

BUILDING SEPARATION:

SECTION EV3.0325(G)(2)(b)(iii)

FOR TWO STORY BUILDINGS OR MORE
FRONT: 30'
SIDE: 15'
REAR: 20'
FOR BUILDINGS HAVING OFFSET SURFACES, EACH YARD MAYBE REDUCED UP TO (5) FEET.

FOR BUILDINGS PLACED AT AN ANGLE WITH EACH OTHER, EACH YARD STANDARD MAY BE REDUCED UP TO (10) FT, MAIN BUILDINGS SHALL BE NO CLOSER THAN (20) FEET AT THE CLOSES POINT.

SEPARATION DISTANCE REQUIRED S3 REAR & S4 SIDE: 20'+15'=35' SEPARATION DISTANCE PROVIDED S3 REAR & S4 SIDE: 24'- 5" SEPARATION DISTANCE REQUIRED S4 FRONT & S5 FRONT:30' + 30'=60' SEPARATION DISTANCE PROVIDED S4 FRONT & S5 FRONT: 71'
SEPARATION DISTANCE REQUIRED S3 SIDE & S5 FRONT: 30'+30'=60' SEPARATION DISTANCE PROVIDED S3 SIDE & S5 FRONT: 80'
PERCENTAGE OF OPENING BASED ON FIRE SEPARATION DISTANCE CBC TABLE 705.8 SEPARATION DISTANCE PROVIDED S3 REAR & S4 SIDE: 24'- 5", PROTECTED, ALLOWABLE AREA

UNLIMITED
SEPARATION DISTANCE PROVIDED S4 FRONT & S5 FRONT: 71', PROTECTED, ALLOWABLE AREA

UNLIMITED
SEPARATION DISTANCE PROVIDED S3 SIDE & S5 FRONT: 80', PROTECTED, ALLOWABLE AREA

UNLIMITED
LANDSCAPE AREA:

GROSS PROPOSED SOUTH LOT AREA: 144, 443 SQ. FT
LANDSCAPE FOR RESIDENTIAL USES REQUIRED: 35% OR
TOTAL LANDSCAPE PHASE 2 REQUIRED: 50,555 SQ. FT.

TOTAL LANDSCAPE PHASE 2(INCLUDES ZANJA): 43,106 SQ. FT.

PARKING LOT LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS (EV4.0260):

LANDSCAPED PLANTERS PROVIDED AT 8 FT IN WIDTH BETWEEN SECTIONS. LANDSCAPE ISLAND PROVIDED FOR EVERY 20 PARKING SPACES. LANDSCAPE ISLANDS SHALL BE A TOTAL OF AT LEAST 7% OF TOTAL PARKING AREA.

TOTAL PARKING AREA PHASE 2: 31,605 SQ. FT.

PARKING LANDSCAPE REQUIRED: 2,212 SQ. FT. = 7% OF PARKING LOT AREA PARKING LANDSCAPE PROVIDED: 7,370 SQ. FT.

NORTH PARKING STANDARDS
# OF STUDIOS X 1 SPACE = # OF SPACES
(106) 1 BEDROOM X 1.5 SPACE = 159 SPACES
(96) 2 BEDROOM X 2 SPACES = 192 SPACES
(21) 3 BEDROOM X 2.5 SPACES = 52.5 SPACES
361 BEDS(GUEST) X 0.25 SPACES/BED = 90.25 GUEST SPACES
B OCCUPANC(LEASE OFF.) 1 SPACE / 250 GSF =10 B OCCUPANCY SPACES TOTAL PARKING REQUIRED: 504 SPACES
EV PARKING REDUCTION 10%: MINUS 51 SPACES
TOTAL PARKING REQUIRED: 453 SPACES
TOTAL PARKING PROVIDED: 414 SPACES

SOUTH PARKING STANDARDS
# OF STUDIOS X 1 SPACE = # OF SPACES
(52) 1 BEDROOM X 1.5 SPACE = 78 SPACES
(47) 2 BEDROOM X 2 SPACES = 94 SPACES
(6) 3 BEDROOM X 2.5 SPACES = 15 SPACES
164 BEDS(GUEST) X 0.25 SPACES/BED = 41 GUEST SPACES
TOTAL PARKING REQUIRED: 191 SPACES
EV PARKING REDUCTION 10%: MINUS 19 SPACES
TOTAL PARKING REQUIRED: 171 SPACES
TOTAL PARKING PROVIDED: 219 SPACES
TOTAL UNITS NORTH + SOUTH: 328

PROPOSED SOUTH PARKING STANDARDS
# OF STUDIOS X 1 SPACE = # OF SPACES
(80) 1 BEDROOM X 1.5 SPACE = 120 SPACES
(84) 2 BEDROOM X 2 SPACES = 168 SPACES
(248) BEDS(GUEST) X 0.25 SPACES/BED = 62 GUEST SPACES
TOTAL PARKING REQUIRED: 350 REQUIRED
EV PARKING REDUCTION 10%: MINUS 35 SPACES
TOTAL PARKING REQUIRED: 315 SPACES
TOTAL PARKING PROVIDED: 80 SPACES
EV PARKING PROVIDED: 5 SPACES
TOTAL UNITS PROPOSED SOUTH: 164
PROPOSED SOUTH COVERED PARKING PER EV4.0201
A MINIMUM OF 1 SPACE PER UNIT TO BE COVERED
TOTAL COVERED PARKING PROPOSED SOUTH REQUIRED: 164
TOTAL COVERED PARKING PROPOSED SOUTH PROVIDED: 42

PROPOSED SOUTH LOT ACCESSIBLE PARKING REQUIREMENTS
ADA SPACES REQUIRED (2% OF TENANT PARKING): 2% X 350 SPACES=7 ADA VAN SPACES REQUIRED (ONE IN EIGHT ACCESSIBLE SPACES): 1 TOTAL ACCESSIBLE PARKING REQUIRED 8
ACCESSIBLE VAN SPACES PROVIDED: 1
ACCESSIBLE SPACES TOTAL PROVIDED: 8
ACCESSIBLE COVERED PARKING 2% OF COVERED REQUIRED: 2
BUILDING DATA:
0 40 60 8020

GRAPHIC SCALE
NORTH
DE A R
T
S
L
CI
NE
ATS
CT
E
CH
TI

LCF AO R
IN
A
IFOE
GARY
W. MILLER
No. C14635
REN. 9-30-21
architecture
interiors
planning
1177 Idaho Street, Suite 200
Redlands, CA 92374
Phone: 909-335-7400
Fax: 909-335-7299
[email protected]
owner approval
revisions/addenda
project information
sheet name
sheet number
initials date phase
Project Number:

Drawn By:

Checked By:

Issue Date:

Sheet
Of Sheets
GWM
© 2017 Miller Architectural Corporation
C:\U
sers\sarah\D
ocum
ents\2
100098.R
A_SD
Hom
esRedlands_AS-101_Site
M
odel_22_21_09_PlanetA
rchelia
.rvt
2100098.RA
SH
6/29/23

SOUTH LOT

SITE PLAN
AS-102

THE VENUE - PHASE II

LUXVIEW PROPERTIES
1600 ORANGE AVE
REDLANDS, CALIFORNIA 92373
11230 Sorrento Valley Road, Suite 140, San Diego, CA 92121 theLuxView.com | [email protected]
SCALE
1" = 20'-0" 1Site Plan - ENLARGED SOUTH LOT
# Date Comment
SCALE
1" = 40'-0"

FLATWORK LEGEND
SCALE
N/A

SITE LEGEND OVERALL
SCALE
N/A

BUILDING DATA

PLANNING SUBMITTAL, NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION OR BID
The Venue at Orange Project Phase 2
City of Redlands
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
380 of 932
The V enue at Orange Project Phase 2
Class 32 CEQA Exemption Checklist
City of Redlands 23
This page was intentionally left blank.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
381 of 932
Figure 7a-1

FIRST FLOOR
0' - 0"

SECOND FLOOR
10' - 0"

THIRD FLOOR
20' - 0"

FOURTH FLOOR
30' - 0"

ROOF PLAN
40' - 0"
1 AF-301
2 AF-301
2 3 4 5 6
1 7 8 9 10 11 12

07.03 C23.14

07.3407.3407.34 07.3407.3407.3407.3407.3407.34

AAAAAAAA A

05.1005.1005.1005.1005.10 09.45

09.47 06.36

07.43 B
B

09.47 B

07.34 05.10
A

09.45 B

09.45 B

09.45 B
51'-5 3/16"
51'-9"
architecture
interiors
planning
DE A R
T
S
L
CI
NE
ATS
CT
E
CH
TI

LCF AO R
IN
A
IFOE
GARY
W. MILLER
No. C14635
REN. 9-30-19
1177 Idaho Street, Suite 200
Redlands, CA 92374
Phone: 909-335-7400
Fax: 909-335-7299
[email protected]
owner approval
revisions/addenda
project information
sheet name
sheet number
initials date phase
Project Number:

Drawn By:

Checked By:

Issue Date:

Sheet
Of Sheets
GWM
© 2017 Miller Architectural CorporationZ:\PROJECTS\2021 Projects\SD Homes Redlands II 2100098.RA\Drawings\Schematic Design\CAD\Building Models\BUILDING S3\BUILDING S3 R19_SH.rvt 2000038.RA
Author
12/12/22
BUILDING S3

EXTERIOR

ELEVATIONS
AF-201

LUXVIEW LUXURY APARTMENTS

LUXVIEW PROPERTIES
1600 ORANGE AVE
REDLANDS, CALIFORNIA 92373
11230 Sorrento Valley Road, Suite 140, San Diego, CA 92121 TheLuxView.com | [email protected]
# Date Comment
SCALE
1/8" = 1'-0" 1South
SCALE
1/8" = 1'-0" 2North
Keynote Legend
Key
Value Keynote Text

05.02 42" High Metal Guardrail - See Detail 9/A-503

05.03 Decorative Railing - See Detail 5/A-503

05.10 36" High Metal Guardrail - See Detail 7/A-503

06.36 Decorative Corbels

07.03 Tile Roofing - See Specifications

07.34 Stucco Integral Color See Specification

07.43 Metal Flashing

09.45 Shaped Foam Trim w/ Stucco Finish Profile "S" See Detail 12/A503"

09.47 Shaped Foam Trim w/ Stucco Finish Profile "U" See Detail 12/A503"

23.14 Roof Vent

23.16 Dryer Vent through wall
FINISH SCHEDULE1

KEYNOTES MANUFACTURER COLOR
A LAHABRA CEMENT PLASTER CRYSTAL WHITE 50 (79) BASE 1 00 FINISH 20/30 FLOAT
B DUNN EDWARDS DE603 "ESSENTIAL BROWN"
C BORAL - BARCALONA "S" TILE SMOKEY TOPAZ BLEND
D PPG - IDEASCAPE GLAZING "CLEAR" SOLARBAN 60

E KAWANEER - STOREFRONT

TRIFAB FRAMING SYSTEM

ANNODIZED ALUMINUM

PLANNING SUBMITTAL, NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION OR BID

FIRST FLOOR
0' - 0"

SECOND FLOOR
10' - 0"

THIRD FLOOR
20' - 0"

FOURTH FLOOR
30' - 0"

ROOF PLAN
40' - 0"
1 AF-301
2 AF-301
23 45 6 1789101112

07.0305.0209.4507.34 07.03

05.10 07.3409.45
C

07.34 A

05.10 07.34
A
A

07.03 07.34
A
C

09.47 07.34
A

07.34 A A

07.34 A
B C

07.03 C C

07.03 B

07.34 A

09.45 A

07.34 23.16

07.34 09.45
BA

05.03 23.16

05.1005.10

07.03 C

07.34 A
B
C

07.34 A

05.10 09.45
B

07.34 AA

09.45 B
B
51'-5 3/16"
51'-9"
21 architecture
interiors
planning
DE A R
T
S
L
CI
NE
ATS
CT
E
CH
TI

LCF AO R
IN
A
IFOE
GARY
W. MILLER
No. C14635
REN. 9-30-19
1177 Idaho Street, Suite 200
Redlands, CA 92374
Phone: 909-335-7400
Fax: 909-335-7299
[email protected]
owner approval
revisions/addenda
project information
sheet name
sheet number
initials date phase
Project Number:

Drawn By:

Checked By:

Issue Date:

Sheet
Of Sheets
GWM
© 2017 Miller Architectural CorporationZ:\PROJECTS\2021 Projects\SD Homes Redlands II 2100098.RA\Drawings\Schematic Design\CAD\Building Models\BUILDING S3\BUILDING S3 R19_SH.rvt 2000038.RA
Author
12/12/22
BUILDING S3

EXTERIOR

ELEVATIONS
AF-201

LUXVIEW LUXURY APARTMENTS

LUXVIEW PROPERTIES
1600 ORANGE AVE
REDLANDS, CALIFORNIA 92373
11230 Sorrento Valley Road, Suite 140, San Diego, CA 92121 TheLuxView.com | [email protected]
# Date Comment
SCALE
1/8" = 1'-0" 1South
SCALE
1/8" = 1'-0" 2North
Keynote Legend
Key
Value Keynote Text

05.02 42" High Metal Guardrail - See Detail 9/A-503

05.03 Decorative Railing - See Detail 5/A-503

05.10 36" High Metal Guardrail - See Detail 7/A-503

06.36 Decorative Corbels

07.03 Tile Roofing - See Specifications

07.34 Stucco Integral Color See Specification

07.43 Metal Flashing

09.45 Shaped Foam Trim w/ Stucco Finish Profile "S" See Detail 12/A503"

09.47 Shaped Foam Trim w/ Stucco Finish Profile "U" See Detail 12/A503"

23.14 Roof Vent

23.16 Dryer Vent through wall
FINISH SCHEDULE1

KEYNOTES MANUFACTURER COLOR
A LAHABRA CEMENT PLASTER CRYSTAL WHITE 50 (79) BASE 1 00 FINISH 20/30 FLOAT
B DUNN EDWARDS DE603 "ESSENTIAL BROWN"
C BORAL - BARCALONA "S" TILE SMOKEY TOPAZ BLEND
D PPG - IDEASCAPE GLAZING "CLEAR" SOLARBAN 60

E KAWANEER - STOREFRONT

TRIFAB FRAMING SYSTEM

ANNODIZED ALUMINUM

PLANNING SUBMITTAL, NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION OR BID
Building S3 Elevations
South Elevation
North Elevation
The Venue at Orange Project Phase 2
City of Redlands
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
382 of 932
The V enue at Orange Project Phase 2
Class 32 CEQA Exemption Checklist
City of Redlands 25
This page was intentionally left blank.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
383 of 932
Figure 7a-2

FIRST FLOOR
0' - 0"

SECOND FLOOR
10' - 0"

THIRD FLOOR
20' - 0"

FOURTH FLOOR
30' - 0"

ROOF PLAN
40' - 0"
1 AF-3022
AF-302
3 AF-302
4 A
F-302
5 A
F-302
6 A
F-302
A B C D E F G H IA1

07.0307.0307.03

07.03 07.03

23.16 07.34

07.3407.3407.34
A
C

C C C AAA
C
51'-9"
architecture
interiors
planning
DE A R
T
S
L
CI
NE
ATS
CT
E
CH
TI

LCF AO R
IN
A
IFOE
GARY
W. MILLER
No. C14635
REN. 9-30-19
1177 Idaho Street, Suite 200
Redlands, CA 92374
Phone: 909-335-7400
Fax: 909-335-7299
[email protected]
owner approval
revisions/addenda
project information
sheet name
sheet number
initials date phase
Project Number:

Drawn By:

Checked By:

Issue Date:

Sheet
Of Sheets
GWM
© 2017 Miller Architectural CorporationZ:\PROJECTS\2021 Projects\SD Homes Redlands II 2100098.RA\Drawings\Schematic Design\CAD\Building Models\BUILDING S3\BUILDING S3 R19_SH.rvt 2000038.RA
Author
12/12/22
BUILDING S3

EXTERIOR

ELEVATIONS
AF-202

LUXVIEW LUXURY APARTMENTS

LUXVIEW PROPERTIES
1600 ORANGE AVE
REDLANDS, CALIFORNIA 92373
11230 Sorrento Valley Road, Suite 140, San Diego, CA 92121 TheLuxView.com | [email protected]
# Date Comment
SCALE
1/8" = 1'-0" 1East
SCALE
1/8" = 1'-0" 2West
FINISH SCHEDULE1

KEYNOTES MANUFACTURER COLOR
A LAHABRA CEMENT PLASTER CRYSTAL WHITE 50 (79) BASE 1 00 FINISH 20/30 FLOAT
B DUNN EDWARDS DE603 "ESSENTIAL BROWN"
C BORAL - BARCALONA "S" TILE SMOKEY TOPAZ BLEND
D PPG - IDEASCAPE GLAZING "CLEAR" SOLARBAN 60

E KAWANEER - STOREFRONT

TRIFAB FRAMING SYSTEM

ANNODIZED ALUMINUM
Keynote Legend
Key
Value Keynote Text

05.02 42" High Metal Guardrail - See Detail 9/A-503

05.03 Decorative Railing - See Detail 5/A-503

05.10 36" High Metal Guardrail - See Detail 7/A-503

06.36 Decorative Corbels

07.03 Tile Roofing - See Specifications

07.34 Stucco Integral Color See Specification

07.43 Metal Flashing

09.45 Shaped Foam Trim w/ Stucco Finish Profile "S" See Detail 12/A503"

09.47 Shaped Foam Trim w/ Stucco Finish Profile "U" See Detail 12/A503"

23.14 Roof Vent

23.16 Dryer Vent through wall

PLANNING SUBMITTAL, NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION OR BID

FIRST FLOOR
0' - 0"

SECOND FLOOR
10' - 0"

THIRD FLOOR
20' - 0"

FOURTH FLOOR
30' - 0"

ROOF PLAN
40' - 0"
1 AF-302
2 AF-302
3 AF-302
4 A
F-302
5 A
F-302
6 A
F-302
ABCDEFGHI A1

07.03 06.36
BC
C

07.03 07.0307.0307.03
CCC

07.3407.3407.3407.3407.3407.3407.3407.3407.34 05.0205.03

AAAAAAA A

05.03 05.10 05.10 05.10 05.10

09.45 A
51'-5 3/16"
51'-1"
architecture
interiors
planning
DE A R
T
S
L
CI
NE
ATS
CT
E
CH
TI

LCF AO R
IN
A
IFOE
GARY
W. MILLER
No. C14635
REN. 9-30-19
1177 Idaho Street, Suite 200
Redlands, CA 92374
Phone: 909-335-7400
Fax: 909-335-7299
[email protected]
owner approval
revisions/addenda
project information
sheet name
sheet number
initials date phase
Project Number:

Drawn By:

Checked By:

Issue Date:

Sheet
Of Sheets
GWM
© 2017 Miller Architectural CorporationZ:\PROJECTS\2021 Projects\SD Homes Redlands II 2100098.RA\Drawings\Schematic Design\CAD\Building Models\BUILDING S3\BUILDING S3 R19_SH.rvt 2000038.RA
Author
12/12/22
BUILDING S3

EXTERIOR

ELEVATIONS
AF-202

LUXVIEW LUXURY APARTMENTS

LUXVIEW PROPERTIES
1600 ORANGE AVE
REDLANDS, CALIFORNIA 92373
11230 Sorrento Valley Road, Suite 140, San Diego, CA 92121 TheLuxView.com | [email protected]
# Date Comment
SCALE
1/8" = 1'-0" 1East
SCALE
1/8" = 1'-0" 2West
FINISH SCHEDULE1

KEYNOTES MANUFACTURER COLOR
A LAHABRA CEMENT PLASTER CRYSTAL WHITE 50 (79) BASE 1 00 FINISH 20/30 FLOAT
B DUNN EDWARDS DE603 "ESSENTIAL BROWN"
C BORAL - BARCALONA "S" TILE SMOKEY TOPAZ BLEND
D PPG - IDEASCAPE GLAZING "CLEAR" SOLARBAN 60

E KAWANEER - STOREFRONT

TRIFAB FRAMING SYSTEM

ANNODIZED ALUMINUM
Keynote Legend
Key
Value Keynote Text

05.02 42" High Metal Guardrail - See Detail 9/A-503

05.03 Decorative Railing - See Detail 5/A-503

05.10 36" High Metal Guardrail - See Detail 7/A-503

06.36 Decorative Corbels

07.03 Tile Roofing - See Specifications

07.34 Stucco Integral Color See Specification

07.43 Metal Flashing

09.45 Shaped Foam Trim w/ Stucco Finish Profile "S" See Detail 12/A503"

09.47 Shaped Foam Trim w/ Stucco Finish Profile "U" See Detail 12/A503"

23.14 Roof Vent

23.16 Dryer Vent through wall

PLANNING SUBMITTAL, NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION OR BID
Building S3 Elevations
East Elevation
West Elevation
The Venue at Orange Project Phase 2
City of Redlands
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
384 of 932
The V enue at Orange Project Phase 2
Class 32 CEQA Exemption Checklist
City of Redlands 27
This page intentionally left blank.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
385 of 932
Figure 7b-1
Level 1
0' - 0"
Level 2
10' - 0"
Level 3
20' - 0"
Level 4
30' - 0"
Level 5
40' - 0"
1234
1 AG-301 2
AG-301

07.3407
.0305.0205.02 09.47 07.3407.3405.02 07.03
AAA CC

05.10 05.10

05.10 07.34
A

23.16 05.02

09.4509.45
BB
51'-5"
51'-8"
architecture
interiors
planning
DE A R
T
S
L
CI
NE
ATS
CT
E
CH
TI

LCF AO R
IN
A
IFOE
GARY
W. MILLER
No. C14635
REN. 9-30-19
1177 Idaho Street, Suite 200
Redlands, CA 92374
Phone: 909-335-7400
Fax: 909-335-7299
[email protected]
owner approval
revisions/addenda
project information
sheet name
sheet number
initials date phase
Project Number:

Drawn By:

Checked By:

Issue Date:

Sheet
Of Sheets
GWM
© 2017 Miller Architectural CorporationZ:\PROJECTS\2021 Projects\SD Homes Redlands II 2100098.RA\Drawings\Schematic Design\CAD\Building Models\BUILDING S4\BUILDING S4 R19.rvt 2100098.RA
Author
4/24/23
BUILDING S4

EXTERIOR

ELEVATIONS
AG-201

LUXVIEW APARTMENTS

LUXVIEW PROPERTIES
1600 ORANGE AVE
REDLANDS, CALIFORNIA 92373
11230 Sorrento Valley Road, Suite 140, San Diego, CA 92121 TheLuxView.com | [email protected]
# Date Comment
SCALE
1/8" = 1'-0" 1South
SCALE
1/8" = 1'-0" 2North
Keynote Legend
Key Value Keynote Text

05.02 42" High Metal Guardrail - See Detail 9/A-503

05.10 36" High Metal Guardrail - See Detail 7/A-503

07.03 Tile Roofing - See Specifications

07.34 Stucco Integral Color See Specification

09.45 Shaped Foam Trim w/ Stucco Finish Profile "S" See Detail 12/A503"

09.47 Shaped Foam Trim w/ Stucco Finish Profile "U" See Detail 12/A503"

23.14 Roof Vent

23.16 Dryer Vent through wall

FINISH SCHEDULE

KEYNOTES MANUFACTURER COLOR
A LAHABRA CEMENT PLASTER CRYSTAL WHITE 50 (79) BASE 1 00 FINISH 20/30 FLOAT
B DUNN EDWARDS DE603 "ESSENTIAL BROWN"
C BORAL - BARCALONA "S" TILE SMOKEY TOPAZ BLEND
D PPG - IDEASCAPE GLAZING "CLEAR" SOLARBAN 60

E KAWANEER - STOREFRONT

TRIFAB FRAMING SYSTEM

ANNODIZED ALUMINUM

PLANNING SUBMITTAL, NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION OR BID
Level 1
0' - 0"
Level 2
10' - 0"
Level 3
20' - 0"
Level 4
30' - 0"
Level 5
40' - 0"
1 2 3 4
1 AG-3012
AG-301

05.0223.14 07.34 07.0305.02 07.03 07.3409.47

09.45 AA C C

07.34 07.34

07.34 A A
A

05.1005.10

23.16 B
B
51'-8"
51'-5"
architecture
interiors
planning
DE A R
T
S
L
CI
NE
ATS
CT
E
CH
TI

LCF AO R
IN
A
IFOE
GARY
W. MILLER
No. C14635
REN. 9-30-19
1177 Idaho Street, Suite 200
Redlands, CA 92374
Phone: 909-335-7400
Fax: 909-335-7299
[email protected]
owner approval
revisions/addenda
project information
sheet name
sheet number
initials date phase
Project Number:

Drawn By:

Checked By:

Issue Date:

Sheet
Of Sheets
GWM
© 2017 Miller Architectural CorporationZ:\PROJECTS\2021 Projects\SD Homes Redlands II 2100098.RA\Drawings\Schematic Design\CAD\Building Models\BUILDING S4\BUILDING S4 R19.rvt 2100098.RA
Author
4/24/23
BUILDING S4

EXTERIOR

ELEVATIONS
AG-201

LUXVIEW APARTMENTS

LUXVIEW PROPERTIES
1600 ORANGE AVE
REDLANDS, CALIFORNIA 92373
11230 Sorrento Valley Road, Suite 140, San Diego, CA 92121 TheLuxView.com | [email protected]
# Date Comment
SCALE
1/8" = 1'-0" 1South
SCALE
1/8" = 1'-0" 2North
Keynote Legend
Key Value Keynote Text

05.02 42" High Metal Guardrail - See Detail 9/A-503

05.10 36" High Metal Guardrail - See Detail 7/A-503

07.03 Tile Roofing - See Specifications

07.34 Stucco Integral Color See Specification

09.45 Shaped Foam Trim w/ Stucco Finish Profile "S" See Detail 12/A503"

09.47 Shaped Foam Trim w/ Stucco Finish Profile "U" See Detail 12/A503"

23.14 Roof Vent

23.16 Dryer Vent through wall

FINISH SCHEDULE

KEYNOTES MANUFACTURER COLOR
A LAHABRA CEMENT PLASTER CRYSTAL WHITE 50 (79) BASE 1 00 FINISH 20/30 FLOAT
B DUNN EDWARDS DE603 "ESSENTIAL BROWN"
C BORAL - BARCALONA "S" TILE SMOKEY TOPAZ BLEND
D PPG - IDEASCAPE GLAZING "CLEAR" SOLARBAN 60

E KAWANEER - STOREFRONT

TRIFAB FRAMING SYSTEM

ANNODIZED ALUMINUM

PLANNING SUBMITTAL, NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION OR BID
Building S4 Elevations
South Elevation
North Elevation
The Venue at Orange Project Phase 2
City of Redlands
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
386 of 932
The V enue at Orange Project Phase 2
Class 32 CEQA Exemption Checklist
City of Redlands 29
This page intentionally left blank.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
387 of 932
Figure 7b-2
Level 1
0' - 0"
Level 2
10' - 0"
Level 3
20' - 0"
Level 4
30' - 0"
Level 5
40' - 0"

A B C D
C

07.03 07.3407.34
A A

05.10 05.10
C

07.03 51'-8"
architecture
interiors
planning
DE A R
T
S
L
CI
NE
ATS
CT
E
CH
TI

LCF AO R
IN
A
IFOE
GARY
W. MILLER
No. C14635
REN. 9-30-19
1177 Idaho Street, Suite 200
Redlands, CA 92374
Phone: 909-335-7400
Fax: 909-335-7299
[email protected]
owner approval
revisions/addenda
project information
sheet name
sheet number
initials date phase
Project Number:

Drawn By:

Checked By:

Issue Date:

Sheet
Of Sheets
GWM
© 2017 Miller Architectural CorporationZ:\PROJECTS\2021 Projects\SD Homes Redlands II 2100098.RA\Drawings\Schematic Design\CAD\Building Models\BUILDING S4\BUILDING S4 R19.rvt 2100098.RA
Author
4/24/23
BUILDING S4

EXTERIOR

ELEVATIONS
AG-202

LUXVIEW APARTMENTS

LUXVIEW PROPERTIES
1600 ORANGE AVE
REDLANDS, CALIFORNIA 92373
11230 Sorrento Valley Road, Suite 140, San Diego, CA 92121 TheLuxView.com | [email protected]
# Date Comment
SCALE
1/8" = 1'-0" 1East
SCALE
1/8" = 1'-0" 2West

PLANNING SUBMITTAL, NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION OR BID
Level 1
0' - 0"
Level 2
10' - 0"
Level 3
20' - 0"
Level 4
30' - 0"
Level 5
40' - 0"
ABCD

07.03 07.34 07.34 07.03
CC A A

05.10 05.10

09.45 09.45
B
B
50'-0"
51'-8"
architecture
interiors
planning
DE A R
T
S
L
CI
NE
ATS
CT
E
CH
TI

LCF AO R
IN
A
IFOE
GARY
W. MILLER
No. C14635
REN. 9-30-19
1177 Idaho Street, Suite 200
Redlands, CA 92374
Phone: 909-335-7400
Fax: 909-335-7299
[email protected]
owner approval
revisions/addenda
project information
sheet name
sheet number
initials date phase
Project Number:

Drawn By:

Checked By:

Issue Date:

Sheet
Of Sheets
GWM
© 2017 Miller Architectural CorporationZ:\PROJECTS\2021 Projects\SD Homes Redlands II 2100098.RA\Drawings\Schematic Design\CAD\Building Models\BUILDING S4\BUILDING S4 R19.rvt 2100098.RA
Author
4/24/23
BUILDING S4

EXTERIOR

ELEVATIONS
AG-202

LUXVIEW APARTMENTS

LUXVIEW PROPERTIES
1600 ORANGE AVE
REDLANDS, CALIFORNIA 92373
11230 Sorrento Valley Road, Suite 140, San Diego, CA 92121 TheLuxView.com | [email protected]
# Date Comment
SCALE
1/8" = 1'-0" 1East
SCALE
1/8" = 1'-0" 2West

PLANNING SUBMITTAL, NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION OR BID
Building S4 Elevations
East Elevation
West Elevation
The Venue at Orange Project Phase 2
City of Redlands
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
388 of 932
The V enue at Orange Project Phase 2
Class 32 CEQA Exemption Checklist
City of Redlands 31
This page intentionally left blank.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
389 of 932
Figure 7c-1
Level 1
0' - 0"
Level 2
10' - 0"
Level 3
20' - 0"
Level 4
30' - 0"
Level 5
40' - 0"
12345789 1.12.14.16.1 3.17.1 7.28.1 6
1 AH-302
2 AH-301
2 AH
-302
1 AH
-301
3 AH
-302
4 AH
-301
3 AH
-301
1 AH
-303
2 AH
-303

07. 34 07.03 07.34 07.34 07.0307.34 07.03 07.34 07.03 07.34 07.03 07.34 07.03 07.34 07.34

05.10 05.10 05.10 05.10

23.16 AACACC AACCC A A ACA

23.16 A
5 AH-303
54'-1"
51'-4"
architecture
interiors
planning
DE A R
T
S
L
CI
NE
ATS
CT
E
CH
TI

LCF AO R
IN
A
IFOE
GARY
W. MILLER
No. C14635
REN. 9-30-19
1177 Idaho Street, Suite 200
Redlands, CA 92374
Phone: 909-335-7400
Fax: 909-335-7299
[email protected]
owner approval
revisions/addenda
project information
sheet name
sheet number
initials date phase
Project Number:

Drawn By:

Checked By:

Issue Date:

Sheet
Of Sheets
GWM
© 2017 Miller Architectural CorporationZ:\PROJECTS\2021 Projects\SD Homes Redlands II 2100098.RA\Drawings\Schematic Design\CAD\Building Models\BUILDING S5\BUILDING S5 R19.rvt 2000038.RA
Author
4/24/23
BUILDING S5

EXTERIOR

ELEVATIONS
AH-201
LuxView Luxury Apartments

LUXVIEW PROPERTIES
1600 ORANGE AVE
REDLANDS, CALIFORNIA 92373
11230 Sorrento Valley Road, Suite 140, San Diego, CA 92121 TheLuxView.com | [email protected]
# Date Comment
SCALE
1/8" = 1'-0" 1South
SCALE
1/8" = 1'-0" 2North

FINISH SCHEDULE

KEYNOTES MANUFACTURER COLOR
A LAHABRA CEMENT PLASTER CRYSTAL WHITE 50 (79) BASE 1 00 FINISH 20/30 FLOAT
B DUNN EDWARDS DE603 "ESSENTIAL BROWN"
C BORAL - BARCALONA "S" TILE SMOKEY TOPAZ BLEND
D PPG - IDEASCAPE GLAZING "CLEAR" SOLARBAN 60

E KAWANEER - STOREFRONT

TRIFAB FRAMING SYSTEM

ANNODIZED ALUMINUM
Keynote Legend
Key Value Keynote Text

05.02 42" High Metal Guardrail - See Detail 9/A-503

05.03 Decorative Railing - See Detail 5/A-503

05.10 36" High Metal Guardrail - See Detail 7/A-503

07.03 Tile Roofing - See Specifications

07.34 Stucco Integral Color See Specification

23.14 Roof Vent

23.16 Dryer Vent through wall

PLANNING SUBMITTAL, NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION OR BID
Level 1
0' - 0"
Level 2
10' - 0"
Level 3
20' - 0"
Level 4
30' - 0"
Level 5
40' - 0"
1 2 3
4 5 7 8 91.1 2.1 4.1 6.13.1 7.1 7.2 8.16
1 AH-302
2 AH-301
2 AH
-302
1 AH
-301
3 AH
-302
4 AH
-301
3 AH
-301
1 AH
-303
2 AH
-303

07.34 07.34 07.34 07.34 07.34 07.34 05.03

23.16 23.14 07.03 07.34

05.03 07.34 07.34

05.02 05.02 05.02 07.3423.16 23.1607.03 07.34

05.1005.1005.1005.1005.1005.10

05.0207.34

AACCA A A A A A A
A A
A
5 AH-303
51'-4"
54'-1"
architecture
interiors
planning
DE A R
T
S
L
CI
NE
ATS
CT
E
CH
TI

LCF AO R
IN
A
IFOE
GARY
W. MILLER
No. C14635
REN. 9-30-19
1177 Idaho Street, Suite 200
Redlands, CA 92374
Phone: 909-335-7400
Fax: 909-335-7299
[email protected]
owner approval
revisions/addenda
project information
sheet name
sheet number
initials date phase
Project Number:

Drawn By:

Checked By:

Issue Date:

Sheet
Of Sheets
GWM
© 2017 Miller Architectural CorporationZ:\PROJECTS\2021 Projects\SD Homes Redlands II 2100098.RA\Drawings\Schematic Design\CAD\Building Models\BUILDING S5\BUILDING S5 R19.rvt 2000038.RA
Author
4/24/23
BUILDING S5

EXTERIOR

ELEVATIONS
AH-201
LuxView Luxury Apartments

LUXVIEW PROPERTIES
1600 ORANGE AVE
REDLANDS, CALIFORNIA 92373
11230 Sorrento Valley Road, Suite 140, San Diego, CA 92121 TheLuxView.com | [email protected]
# Date Comment
SCALE
1/8" = 1'-0" 1South
SCALE
1/8" = 1'-0" 2North

FINISH SCHEDULE

KEYNOTES MANUFACTURER COLOR
A LAHABRA CEMENT PLASTER CRYSTAL WHITE 50 (79) BASE 1 00 FINISH 20/30 FLOAT
B DUNN EDWARDS DE603 "ESSENTIAL BROWN"
C BORAL - BARCALONA "S" TILE SMOKEY TOPAZ BLEND
D PPG - IDEASCAPE GLAZING "CLEAR" SOLARBAN 60

E KAWANEER - STOREFRONT

TRIFAB FRAMING SYSTEM

ANNODIZED ALUMINUM
Keynote Legend
Key Value Keynote Text

05.02 42" High Metal Guardrail - See Detail 9/A-503

05.03 Decorative Railing - See Detail 5/A-503

05.10 36" High Metal Guardrail - See Detail 7/A-503

07.03 Tile Roofing - See Specifications

07.34 Stucco Integral Color See Specification

23.14 Roof Vent

23.16 Dryer Vent through wall

PLANNING SUBMITTAL, NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION OR BID
Building S5 Elevations
East Elevation
West Elevation
The Venue at Orange Project Phase 2
City of Redlands
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
390 of 932
The V enue at Orange Project Phase 2
Class 32 CEQA Exemption Checklist
City of Redlands 33
This page intentionally left blank.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
391 of 932
Figure 8

PLANT SCHEDULE
01-04
01-05
01-06
North
20 0 20 40 60
Scale 1" = 20'

REVISIONS

OF SHEETS
SHEET
SCALE
JOB NO.

DATE

CHECKED BY

DESIGNED BY

DRAWN BY

UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT
CALL: TOLL FREE
811

TWO WORKING DAYS BEFORE YOU DIG

REDLANDS, CA

LUXVIEW PROPERTIES

LUXVIEW VENUE II
exp. date
signature
date
10/24
12/14/22

LUXURY APARTMENTS
CLP-1

LANDSCAPE PLAN

CONCEPTUAL

PRELIMINARY-NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION

MAWA AND ETWU CALCULATIONS

VICINITY MAP
North
RW
RW
RW
RW
RW
BLDG S3
BLDG S3
BLDG S3
BLDG S4
BLDG S4
BLDG S5
BLDG S5
01-01
01-02
01-03
01-03
01-04
01-05
01-05
01-05
01-05
01-05
01-06
BLDG S3
01-01
01-02
01-03
01-04
01-05
01-06
01 GENERAL SCHEDULE
North
20 0 20 40 60
Scale 1" = 20'

REVISIONS

OF SHEETS
SHEET
SCALE
JOB NO.

DATE

CHECKED BY

DESIGNED BY

DRAWN BY

UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT
CALL: TOLL FREE
811

TWO WORKING DAYS BEFORE YOU DIG

REDLANDS, CA

LUXVIEW PROPERTIES

LUXVIEW VENUE II
exp. date
signature
date
10/24
12/14/22

LUXURY APARTMENTS
CLP-1

LANDSCAPE PLAN

CONCEPTUAL

PRELIMINARY-NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION

MAWA AND ETWU CALCULATIONS

VICINITY MAP
North
Proposed Landscape Plan
The Venue at Orange Project Phase 2
City of Redlands
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
392 of 932
The V enue at Orange Project Phase 2
Class 32 CEQA Exemption Checklist
City of Redlands 35
This page intentionally left blank.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
393 of 932
The V enue at Orange Project Phase 2
Class 32 CEQA Exemption Checklist
City of Redlands 36
4 CLASS 32 INFILL EXEMPTION REQUIREMENTS
Article 19 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA Guidelines Sections 15300 to 15333), includes a list of classes of projects that have been determined to not have a significant effect on the environment and as a result, are exempt from review under CEQA.

Class 32 Infill Exemption
One of the classes of projects exempt from CEQA review are projects that are specified as urban infill devel
opment. CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 defines the Class 32 Infill Exemption as a project that meets the following five requirements:
a) The project is consistent with the applicable general plan designation and all applicable general plan policies as well as with applicable zoning designation and regulations. b) The proposed development occurs within city limits on a project site of no more than five acres substantially surrounded by urban uses.
c) The project site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species. d) Approval of the project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality.
e) The site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services.

Exceptions
In addition to meeting the five requirements stated above, the CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 provides specific instances where exceptions apply to a project that would otherwise meet the requirements for an exemption. These exceptions are:
a) Location: Classes 3, 4, 5, 6, and 11 are qualified by consideration of where the project is to be located – a project that is ordinarily insignificant in its impact on the environment may in a particularly sensitive environment be significant. Therefore, these classes are considered to apply in all instances, except where the project may impact on an environmental resource of hazardous or critical concern where designated, precisely mapped, and officially adopted pursuant to law by federal, state, or local agencies.
b) Cumulative Impact: All exemptions for these classes are inapplicable when the cumulative impact of successive projects of the same type in the same place, over time is significant. c) Significant Effects: A categorical exemption shall not be used for an activity where there is a reasonable possibility that the activity will have a significant effect on the environment due to unusual circumstances.
d) Scenic Highways: A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project which may result in damage to scenic resources, including but not limited to, trees, historic buildings, rock outcroppings, or similar resources, within a highway officially designated as a state scenic highway. This does not apply to improvements which are required as mitigation by an adopted negative declaration or certified EIR.
e) Hazardous Waste Sites: A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project located on a site which is included on any list complied pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code. f) Historical Resources: A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project which may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of historical resources.

4.1 PROPOSED PROJECT CEQA EXEMPTION
The analysis below provides substantial evidence that the pro posed Project properly qualifies for an
exemption under CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 (i.e., Class 32) and, as a result, would not have a Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
394 of 932
The Venue at Orange Project Phase 2
Class 32 CEQA Exemption Checklist
City of Redlands 37
significant effect on the environment. Additionally, the analysis shows there are no exceptions to qualifying for the categorical exemption, as identified in CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2. a. Criterion Section 15332(a): General Plan and Zoning Consistency: The Project is consistent with the applicable general plan designation and all applicable general plan policies as well as with applicable zoning designation and regulations.

The Project site has a City of Redlands General Plan Land Use designation of Medium Density Residential.

The Project site is also within the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan and is zoned as Multiple Family Residential-2500 District (EV2500RM), which allows the development with densities of up to 15 residential dwelling units per acre.

As previously described, fifty of the proposed dwelling units would be designated for low-income housing, in exchange for the approval of a density bonus and several development concessions and waivers as allowed under State Density Bonus Law. Table 6 shows the proposed Project’s consistency with the EV2500RM development standards . The Project is generally consistent with applicable development standards. State Density Bonus Law allows development standards, which may prevent the project from being built at the permitted density be waived and there are no limits places on the number of development standard waivers that may be requested or granted. Therefore, the Project is consistent with the applicable general plan designation and zoning regulations (Wollmer v. City of Berkeley (2011) 193 Cal.App.4th 1329 [applying the Class 32 exemption to a density bonus project].) Table 6: EV2500RM Development Standards
Development Feature EV2500RM Zoning
Requirement
Proposed Project Consistency
Minimum Lot Area

12,000 SF

Consistent. The Project site is
approximately 1 43,748 SF, which
exceeds the 12,000 SF minimum.

Minimum Lot Dimension Width: 100 ft
Depth: 120 ft
Consistent. The Project site has a width
and depth of approximately 326 feet
and 410 feet, respectively.

Maximum Coverage 45% of lot area Consistent. The proposed Project would have a building coverage of 36.2% of
the lot area.

Population Density Minimum of 2,500 SF/du, not
to exceed 15 du/acre
Consistent. Through the approval of a
density bonus, the proposed Project and
Approved Project would result in a
density of approximately 22.5 du/acre
per State Density Bonus Law.

Building Height 3 stories Consistent. The proposed Project would result in a maximum building height of 4
stories, as allowed as a height
concession under
State Density Bonus
Law.

Front yard setback 25 ft (35 ft for 3-story
building)
Not Applicable. The proposed Project
does not front any public streets.

Street side setback 25 ft (35 ft for 3-story
building)
Not Applicable. The proposed Project is
not adjacent to any public streets.

Side yard setback 10 ft (add 5 ft for each story
above first)
Consistent. The proposed Project would
provide a 56 -foot setback from the
eastern property line and a 25 -foot
setback from the western property line.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
395 of 932
The Venue at Orange Project Phase 2
Class 32 CEQA Exemption Checklist
City of Redlands 38

b. Criterion Section 15332(b): Project Location, Size, and Context: The proposed development occurs within City limits on a Project site of no more than five acres substantially surrounded by urban uses.

The proposed Project is within the city limits of the City of Redlands, on a 3.3-acre site, south of the corner of Orange Avenue and Alabama Street . As shown on Figure 3, the site is surrounded by multi- family residences to the north, single family residences to the west and east, and vacant land to the south. As the Project site is less than five acres and substantially surrounded by urban uses, it meets the criteria of CEQA Guidelines Section 15332(b).
c. Criterion Section 15332(c): Endangered, Rare, or Threatened Species: The Project site was determined to have no value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species.

The 3.3-acre Project site contains multiple ornamental trees along the western and southern border, as well as sparsely throughout the site. However, the Project site, aside from the area within the historic Mill Creek Zanja channel, has been heavily graded due to adjacent residential development as shown in Figure 3, Project Aerial. As such, the Project site has been disturbed by adjacent development and does not contain any endangered, rare or threatened species. T he Applicant is required to comply with Sections 3503, 3503.5, and 3513 of the California Fish and Game Code and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA).

Compliance with the California Fish and Game Code and MBTA would ensure that impacts to nesting birds and raptors, which may use vegetation, including existing scattered ornamental trees on or near the Project site for nesting, during construction would not occur.

For the reasons described above, the proposed Project site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species and meets the criteria of CEQA Guidelines Section 15332(c). d. Criterion Section 15332(d): Significant Effects: Approval of the Project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality.

TRAFFIC
The Project proposes the construction of 164 residential dwelling units on the Project site. The Project trip generation was prepared using trip rates from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation, 11th Edition (2021).

Development Feature EV2500RM Zoning
Requirement
Proposed Project Consistency
Rear yard setback 25 ft Consistent. The proposed Project would provide a 25 -foot setback from the
southern property line.

Parking Requirement 1-bedroom: 1.5 spaces/unit
2-bedrooms: 2 spaces/unit
Guest: 0.25 spaces/bed
Consistent. The proposed Project would
provide 132 total parking spaces , as
allowed under the approval of the
density bonus.

Minimum Common Outdoor
Living Area
34,026 SF Consistent. Required: 3 4,026 SF.

Provided: 43,809 SF.

Minimum Common Outdoor
Landscaping
13,143 SF Consistent. The proposed Project would
provide 19,084 SF of landscaped
common outdoor space.

Private Outdoor Living Area 150 SF for ground floor units Consistent. The proposed Project would provide a minimum of 150 SF of private
outdoor space for all ground floor units.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
396 of 932
The Venue at Orange Project Phase 2
Class 32 CEQA Exemption Checklist
City of Redlands 39
As shown in Table 7, the operation of the proposed Project would generate 745 daily trips including 61 trips during the AM peak hour and 64 trips during the PM peak hour as calculated using trip rates from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE).

Table 7: Project Trip Generation
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Land Use Units Daily In Out Total In Out Total
Trip Rates
Multifamily Housing (Mid-Rise, Not Close to
Rail Transit)1 DU 4.54 0.23 0.77 0.37 0.61 0.39 0.39
Project Trip Generation
Dwelling Units 164 DU 745 14 47 61 39 25 64
1 Trip rates from the Institute of Transportation Engineers, Trip Generation, 11th Edition, 2021. Land Use Code 221 Multifamily Housing (Mid-Rise, Not Close to Rail Transit).

Source: Ganddini Group, 2023a (Appendix A)

The City of Redlands CEQA Assessment VMT Analysis Guidelines provide vehicle miles traveled ( VMT) screening thresholds to identify projects that would be considered to have a less than significant impact on VMT and therefore could be screened out for further analysis. If a project meets one of the following criteria, then the VMT impact of the project would be considered less than significant and no further analysis of VMT would be required:

1. The project is in a Transit Priority Area (TPA).

2. The project is in a low VMT generating area.

3. The project is one of the following land uses:
o Local-serving retail use less than 50,000 SF in area
o Local-serving K-12 school
o Local park
o Daycare center
o Local-serving gas stations
o Local-serving banks
o Local-serving hotel (e.g., non-destination hotel)
o Student housing project on or adjacent to a college campus o Local-serving assembly use (place of worship, community organization) o Community institutions (public libraries, fire stations, local government) o Local-serving community colleges that are consistent with the assumptions noted in the

RTP/SCS
o Affordable or supportive housing
o Assisted living facility
o Senior housing (as defined by the Federal Department of Housing and Urban Development) o Project which generates less than 3,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MTCO2e) per year can be presumed to have a less than significant impact on VMT. Projects which generate less than 3,000 MTCO2e per year include the following:
 Single-family residential – 167 dwelling units or fewer  Multifamily residential (low-rise) – 232 dwelling units or fewer  Multifamily residential (mid-rise) – 299 dwelling units or fewer  Office – 59,100 SF or less
 Local-serving retail – 112,400 SF or less (no stores larger than 50,000 SF)  Warehousing – 463,400 SF or less
 Light industrial – 74,600 SF or less
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
397 of 932
The Venue at Orange Project Phase 2
Class 32 CEQA Exemption Checklist
City of Redlands 40
A VMT Screening Assessment was prepared for the proposed Project (included as Appendix A) to determine the applicability of each of the Screening Criteria, further described below.

Screening Criteria 1 – Tr ansit Priority Area Screening: According to the City’s guidelines, projects within one- half mile of a major transit stop or high- quality transit corridor may be presumed to have a less than significant VMT impact. TPAs within San Bernardino County are mapped by the San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA) VMT Screening Tool. Based on this tool, the proposed Project is not within a TPA; therefore, the Project does not satisfy Screening Criteria 1.

Screening Criteria 2 – Low VMT Generating Area Screening: Per City’s guidelines, residential and office projects located within a low VMT generating area may be presumed to have a less than significant impact absent substantial evidence to the contrary (Appendix A). Low VMT generating areas are defined as traffic analysis zones (TAZs) with a total daily VMT/Service Population (employment plus population) that is 15 percent less than the baseline level for the County. Based on the SBCTA VMT Screening Tool, the Project is not in a low VMT generating area; therefore, the Project does not satisfy Screening Criteria 2.

Screening Criteria 3 – Proje ct Land Use Screening: The Project proposes the construction of three four-story apartment buildings inclusive of 164 dwelling units, which is less than the threshold of 299 mid-rise multifamily residential dwelling units. As further discussed below, the proposed Project also would generate less than 3,000 MTCO2e per year. Thus, the proposed Project satisfies the City -established project type screening criteria and would result in less than significant VMT impacts.

The proposed Project w
ould not result in any significant effects relating to traffic; therefore, the proposed Project meets the traffic related criteria of CEQA Guidelines Section 15332(d).

NOISE
Noise Terminology
Various noise descriptors are utilized in this noise analysis, and are summarized as follows:

Leq: The equivalent sound level, which is used to describe noise over a specified period of time, typically 1- hour, in terms of a single numerical value. The Leq of a time-varying signal and that of a steady signal are the same if they deliver the same acoustic energy over a given time. The Leq may also be referred to as the average sound level.

Lmax: The instantaneous maximum noise level experienced during a given period of time.

Lmin: The instantaneous minimum noise level experienced during a given period of time.

CNEL: The Community Noise Equivalent Level, which, similar to the Ldn, is the average A-weighted noise level during a 24-hour day that is obtained after an addition of 5 dBA to measured noise levels between the hours of 7:00 pm to 10:00 pm and after an addition of 10 dBA to noise levels between the hours of 10:00 pm to 7:00 am to account for noise sensitivity in the evening and nighttime, respectively.

Ambient Noise: The “ambient noise level” is the background noise level associated with a given environment at a specified time and is usually a composite of sound from many sources from many directions.

Noise Regulations
Noise Element of the General Plan
The City’s General Plan Noise Element includes a compatibility matrix (Exhibit 3-A of the Noise Element) to determine if new land uses are compatible with the existing noise environment . Exterior noise levels for residential land uses are normally acceptable below 60 dBA CNEL and conditionally acceptable with noise levels below 75 dBA CNEL.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
398 of 932
The Venue at Orange Project Phase 2
Class 32 CEQA Exemption Checklist
City of Redlands 41
Municipal Code
Municipal Code Section 8. 06.070, Exterior Noise Limits. Noise levels shall not exceed levels set forth in Table 8, below.

Table 8: Municipal Code Exterior Permitted Noise Levels Land
Use1
Time
Period
Exterior Noise
Level Standards
(dBA Leq)2
Residential,
Institutional
Daytime (7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.) 60
Nighttime (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.) 50
1 Source: City of Redlands Municipal Code, Section 8.06.070 (Appendix 3.1). 2 Leq represents a steady state sound level containing the same total energy as a time varying signal over a given sample period.

Source: Noise Impact Analysis, Appendix B
In addition, it is unlawful to cause the noise level on any residential property to exceed these interior noise standards:

1. For a cumulative period of more than 5 minutes in any hour;

2. Plus 5 dB(A) for a cumulative period of more than 1 minute in any hour; or

3. Plus 10 dB(A) for any period of time.

Section 8.06.120 of the City’s Municipal Code states that the noise standards shall not apply to noise sources associated with new construction, remodeling, rehabilitation, or grading of any private property, provided such activities take place between the hours of 7:00 am and 8:00 pm on weekdays, including Saturdays, with no activity taking place at any time on Sundays or federal holidays. In addition, all motorized equipment used in such activities is required to be equipped with functioning mufflers.

Construction. The c
onstruction noise threshold from the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH)), identifies a significant construction noise impact if construction noise exceeds 85 dBA Leq over an eight-hour period during the daytime at the nearby sensitive receivers (e.g., residential, etc.).

The Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment ( 2018) provides thresholds for increases in ambient noise from vehicular traffic based on increases to ambient noise. An impact would occur if existing noise levels at noise-sensitive land uses (e.g., residential, etc.) are less than 60 dBA CNEL and the Project creates an increase of 3 dBA CNEL or greater Project-related noise level increase; or if existing noise l evels range from 60 to 65 dBA CNEL and the Project creates 2 dBA CNEL or greater noise level increase.

Construction Noise: The construction activities for the proposed Project are anticipated to include demolition, site preparation, grading, building construction, paving, an d architectural coating. Construction of the proposed Project would occur over a 20-month period. Noise impacts from construction activities associated with the proposed Project would be a function of the noise generated by construction equipment, equipment location, sensitivity of nearby land uses, and the timing and duration of the construction activities. Noise levels generated by heavy construction equipment have the potential to range from approximately 68dBA to 81 dBA at 50 feet in distance, as shown on Table 9.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
399 of 932
The Venue at Orange Project Phase 2
Class 32 CEQA Exemption Checklist
City of Redlands 42
Table 9: Construction Reference Noise Levels
Construction
Stage
Reference
Construction
Equipmnet1
Reference Noise
Level @ 50 Feet
(dBA Leq)
Composite Reference
Noise Level
(dBA Leq)
Reference
Power Level
(dBA Lw)
Site
Preparation
Dozer 78.0

83.4 115.1 Front End Loader 75.0
Grader 81.0
Grading
Excavator 77.0

84.0 115.6 Tractor 80.0
Scraper 80.0
Building
Construction
Crane 73.0

77.4 109.1 Backhoe 74.0
Generator (<25kVA) 70.0
Paving
Paver 74.0

77.8 109.5 Dump Truck 72.0
Roller 73.0
Architectural
Coating
Man Lift 68.0

76.2 107.8 Compressor (air) 74.0
Generator (<25kVA) 70.0
1 FHWA Road Construction Noise Model.

Source Noise Impact Analysis, Appendix B

Per Section 8.06.120(G) of the City’s Municipal Code, noise from construction activities is exempt from the City’s established noise standards if the activities occur between the hours of 7 :00 a.m. and 6 :00 p.m.

Monday through Saturday and no construction on Sundays or federal holidays. The proposed Project’s construction activities would occur pursuant to these regulations, which would be detailed in the construction permits. Therefore, Project construction would be compliant with the City’s noise related standards and impacts related to standards would be less than significant.

Neither the City’s General Plan nor Municipal Code establish numeric maximum acceptable construction source noise levels at potentially affected receivers, which would allow for a quantified determination of what CEQA constitutes a substantial temporary or periodic noise increase. Thus, the construction noise thresholds from the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), have been utilized, which identifies a significant construction noise impact if construction noise exceeds 8 5 dBA at sensitive receptors.

The nearest sensitive receptors to the Project site are surrounding residential residences located as near as 12 feet to the west and a church located 55 feet south of the project.

Modeling of the construction noise to the location of the existing sensitive receptors is summarized in Table 10, which shows that construction noise at the closest sensitive receptors is anticipated to range from 59.2 dBA Leq to 75.3 dBA Leq, which is less than the 8 5 dBA threshold. Therefore, noise impacts would be less than significant. In addition, the construction noise over the 20-month period would be temporary in nature as the operation of each piece of construction equipment would not be constant throughout the construction day, and equipment would be turned off when not in use. The typical operating cycle f or a piece of construction equipment involves one or two minutes of full power operation followed by three or four minutes at lower power settings.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
400 of 932
The Venue at Orange Project Phase 2
Class 32 CEQA Exemption Checklist
City of Redlands 43
Table 10: Construction Equipment Noise Levels at the Nearest Sensitive Receptors Receiver
Location1
Construction Noise Levels (dBA Leq)
Site
Preparation Grading Building
Construction Paving Architectural
Coating
Highest
Levels2
R1 72.8 73.3 66.7 67.2 65.5 75.3
R2 69.8 70.3 63.7 64.2 62.5 72.3
R3 72.6 73.1 66.5 67.0 65.3 75.1
R4 66.5 67.0 60.4 60.9 59.2 69.0
1 Construction noise source and receiver locations are shown on Exhibit 10-A. 2 Construction noise level calculations based on distance from the project site boundaries (construction activity area) to nearby receiver locations. CadnaA construction noise model inputs are included in Appendix 10.1.

Source: Noise Impact Analysis, Appendix B

Overall, as temporary construction activity would occur in compliance with the City’s regulations and would be less than the noise level threshold of 85 dBA at existing sensitive receptors, impacts related to construction noise would be less than significant.

Operational Noise: The proposed Project would result in the operation of 492 dwelling units between the proposed Project site and the existing Venue at Orange site. Potential noise impacts associated with the Project would be from Project-generated vehicular traffic on the nearby roadways, parking lot activity and air conditioning units . In addition, the proposed development would be adjacent to Alabama Street and Orange Street, which may create exterior and interior noise levels in excess of City standards at the proposed residences.

Vehicular Noise. Vehicle noise is a combination of the noise produced by the engine, exhaust and tires. The level of traffic noise depends on three primary factors (1) the volume of traffic, (2) the speed of traffic, and (3) the number of trucks in the flow of traffic. The proposed Project is a residential Project that would not result in a substantial number of truck trips and the proposed Project would not alter the speed limit on any existing roadway so the proposed Project’s potential offsite noise impacts have been focused on the noise impacts associated with the change of volume of traffic that would occur with development of the proposed Project.

Neither the General Plan nor the CEQA Guidelines define what constitutes a “substantial permanent increase to ambient noise levels ,” as such, this impact analysis has utilized guidance from the Federal Transit Administration and the FHWA traffic noise model to identify noise level increases. The proposed Project’s offsite traffic noise impacts have been calculated through a comparison of the without Pr oject scenario to the with Project scenario. As detailed in the Transportation discussion and listed in Table 7, the Project is anticipated to generate 745 daily trips with 61 vehicular trips in the AM peak hour and 64 vehicular trips in the PM peak hour. Table 11 shows that these vehicular trips would result in at most a 0.7 dBA noise level increase, and they are all below their respective dBA noise level threshold s. Therefore, the Project would result in a less than significant impact related to vehicular noise.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
401 of 932
The Venue at Orange Project Phase 2
Class 32 CEQA Exemption Checklist
City of Redlands 44
Table 11: Existing With Project Traffic Noise Level Increases ID Road Segment
CNEL at Receiving
Land Use (dBA)2
Incremental Noise
Level Increase
Threshold3
No
Project
With
Project
Project
Addition Limit Exceeded?
1 Iowa Street n/o Orange Avenue to Barton Road 61.7 61.9 0.2 3.0 No 2 Alabama Street n/o North of Redlands Boulevard 68.2 68.2 0.0 1.5 No 3 Alabama Street n/o Redlands Boulevard to Park Avenue 67.2 67.3 0.1 1.5 No 4 Alabama Street n/o Park Avenue to Citrus Avenue/State Street 69.5 69.6 0.1 1.5 No
5 Alabama Street n/o Citrus Avenue/State Street to Orange Avenue 69.3 69.5 0.2 1.5 No
6 Alabama Street n/o Orange Avenue to Barton Road 69.2 69.2 0.0 1.5 No 7 Redland Blvd n/o West of Alabama Street 69.2 69.3 0.1 1.5 No 8 Redland Blvd n/o East of Alabama Street 68.7 68.7 0.0 1.5 No 9 Orange Avenue w/o West of Iowa Street 62.9 63.1 0.2 3.0 No 10 Orange Avenue w/o East of Iowa Street 63.4 63.7 0.3 3.0 No 11 Orange Avenue w/o West of Alabama Street 64.4 65.1 0.7 3.0 No 12 Orange Avenue w/o East of Alabama Street 63.4 63.5 0.1 3.0 No 13 Barton Road e/o West of Iowa Street 70.5 70.5 0.0 1.5 No 14 Barton Road e/o Iowa Street to Alabama Street 70.4 70.4 0.0 1.5 No 15 Barton Road w/o East of Alabama Street 68.8 68.8 0.0 1.5 No 1 Based on a review of existing aerial imagery. Noise sensitive uses limited to existing residential land uses. 2 The CNEL is calculated at the boundary of the right-of-way of each roadway and the property line of the receiving land use. 3 Does the Project create an incremental noise level increase exceeding the significance criteria (Table 4-1)? Source: Noise Impact Analysis, Appendix B
Roadway Noise Impacts to Proposed Residential Development.

Exterior Noise. The R edlands General Plan Title 8.06.070 and 8. 06.080 requires new multi -family developments to meet the normally acceptable exterior noise standard of 60 dBA CNEL and an interior noise standard of 45 dBA CNEL. It is anticipated that the primary source of noise impacts to the Project site would be from traffic noise from Orange Avenue, Alabama Street, and Barton Road. The calculated noise levels from vehicle noise on each floor within their exterior areas are listed on Table 12. As shown, the noise levels would be below the City’s 6 0 dBA CNEL residential exterior noise standard. Thus, impacts would be less than significant.

Table 12: Exterior Noise Level
On-Site Receiver
Location Roadway
Unmitigated Exterior Noise Level (dBA
CNEL)1
1st Floor 2nd
Floor 3rd Floor 4th Floor
B1 Northern Façade Orange Avenue 49.8 49.8 49.8 49.8
B1 Eastern Façade Alabama Street 57.3 57.3 57.3 57.3
B3 Eastern Façade Alabama Street 58.0 58.0 58.0 58.0
B3 Sothern Façade Barton Road 54.5 54.5 54.5 54.5
1 Exterior noise calculations at the building façade are shown in Appendix B.

Source: Noise Impact Analysis, Appendix B
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
402 of 932
The Venue at Orange Project Phase 2
Class 32 CEQA Exemption Checklist
City of Redlands 45
Interior Noise. As described in the Noise Impact Analysis, all new residences constructed in California are required to be designed to meet Title 24 Part 6 building energy efficiency requirements, that require the installation of standard dual pane windows that have a minimum sound transmission class (STC) rating of 26 STC as well as walls with ½ -inch drywall on the interior, minimum R -13 insulation, ½ -inch sheer panel, a vapor layer, and a stucco exterior. New residences built to meet the Title 24 standards have a minimum of 25 dB of exterior to interior noise reduction rate.

To assess the interior noise levels related to compliance with the 45 dBA CNEL interior noise standard, the exter
ior and interior noise levels at the façade of the first, second, third and fourth floors were calculated for each analyzed building. Table 13 shows the calculated exterior to interior noise levels for dwellings near Orange Avenue, Alabama Street, and Barton Road. As shown, the interior noise levels would be within the City’s residential interior noise standards of 45 dBA CNEL with implementation of the window -closed condition, which provides for a window closed condition pursuant to current requirements. Therefore, the proposed Project would comply with the City’s residential interior noise standards and impacts related to interior noise levels would be less than significant.

Table 13: Proposed Townhomes Exterior to Interior Noise Reduction Rates On-Site
Receiver
Location Roadway Floor
Exterior Noise Level at
Building Façade1(dBA CNEL)
Interior Noise
Levels2 (dBA CNEL)
Exceed City’s 45 dBA
CNEL Interior
Standard?
B1
Northern
Facade
Orange
Avenue
1 49.8 21.8 No
2 49.8 24.8 No
3 49.8 24.8 No
4 49.8 24.8 No
B1
Eastern
Facade
Alabama
Street
1 57.3 29.3 No
2 57.3 32.3 No
3 57.3 32.3 No
3 57.3 32.3 No
B3
Eastern
Facade
Alabama
Street
1 58.0 30.0 No
2 58.0 33.0 No
3 58.0 33.0 No
4 58.0 33.0 No
B3
Southern
Facade
Barton
Road
1 54.5 26.5 No
2 54.5 29.5 No
3 54.5 29.5 No
4 54.5 29.5 No
Notes: 1 Exterior noise level at the facade with a windows closed condition requiring a means of mechanical ventilation (e.g. air conditioning). 2 Estimated interior noise level with minimum STC rating for all windows.

Source: Noise Impact Analysis, Appendix B
Aircraft Noise. The nearest airport is San Gabriel Valley Airport that is located 3.39 miles southwest of the Project site. The Project site is located outside of the 60 dBA CNEL noise contours of this airport. Therefore, the proposed townhomes would not be exposed to excessive aircraft noise and impacts would be less than significant.

Ground-borne Vibration. The City does not have quantified vibration standards applicable to the proposed project. However, the Caltrans Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual (2013) provides guidelines for assessing the potential for adverse vibration effects related to structural damage and human perception. Construction activity can result in varying degrees of ground vibration, depending on the equipment used on the site. Op eration of construction equipment causes ground vibrations tha t spread through the ground and diminish in strength with distance. Buildings in the vicinity of the construction site respond to these vibrations with varying results ranging from no perceptible effects at the low levels to slight damage at the highest levels. Table 14 provides vibration levels for particular construction activities at a distance of 25 feet.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
403 of 932
The Venue at Orange Project Phase 2
Class 32 CEQA Exemption Checklist
City of Redlands 46
Table 14: Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment at 25 Feet Equipment PPV (in/sec) at 25 feet
Large bulldozer 0.089
Loaded trucks 0.076
Jackhammer 0.035
Small bulldozer 0.003
Source: Federal Transit Administration, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual The primary source of vibration during construction would be from the operation of a bulldozer. As shown on Table 14, a large bulldozer would create a vibration level of 0.089 inch -per-second PPV at 25 feet.

Based on typical propagation rates, the vibration level at the nearest offsite sensitive receptors (single- family residence as near as 12 feet to the west of the project site) would be 0.0 4 inch per second PPV, which would be below the 0.25 inch per second PPV threshold detailed above. Therefore, impacts related to construction vibration would be less than significant.

Overall, the proposed residential Project would not result in any significant effects relating to noise or vibration; therefore, the proposed Project meets the noise related criteria of CEQA Guidelines Section 15332(d).

AIR QUALITY
Air Quality Management Plan Consistency: The Project site is located in the South Coast Air Basin, which is under the jurisdictional boundaries of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). The SCAQMD and Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) are responsible for pre paring the Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP), which addresses federal and state Clean Air Act (CAA) requirements.

The AQMP details goals, policies, and programs for improving air quality in the Basin. In preparation of the AQMP, SCAQMD and SCAG use land use designations contained in General Plan documents to forecast, inventory, and allocate regional emissions from land use and development-related sources.

As described in Chapter 12, Section 12.2 and Section 12.3 of the SCAQMD’s CEQA Air Quality Handbook (1993), for purposes of analyzing consistency with the AQMP, if a proposed project would have a development density and vehicle trip generation that is subs tantially greater than what was anticipated in the General Plan, then the proposed project would conflict with the AQMP. On the other hand, if a project’s density is consistent with the General Plan, its emissions would be consistent with the assumptions in the AQMP, and the project would not conflict with SCAQMD’s attainment plans. In addition, the SCAQMD considers projects consistent with the AQMP if the project would not result in an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations or cause a new violation.

The Project site is vacant, undeveloped, and adjacent to residential development. The proposed Project would develop 164 residential units on-site, which is consistent with the General Plan land use designation of Medium Density Residential. The California Department of Finance (CDF) details that the City of Redlands had 27,681 residential units in 202 3. The 164 new residences would result in a 0. 6 percent increase in residential units within the City. The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) Demographics and Growth Forecast (SCAG 2020) forecasts 30,800 households in the City in year 2045, which is an increase of 3,119 residential units (or 10 percent) over the number of units in 2023. As such, the limited level of growth associated with the proposed Project would not exceed growth projections and would be consistent with the assumptions in the AQMP.

Also, emissions generated by construction and operation of the proposed Project would not exceed thresholds. As described in the analysis below, the proposed Project would not result in an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations or cause a new violation.

Construction Emissions : Construction activities associated with the proposed Project would generate pollutant emissions from the following construction activities: site preparation, grading, building construction, paving, architectural coating. The quantity of emissions generated on a daily basis would vary, depending Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
404 of 932
The Venue at Orange Project Phase 2
Class 32 CEQA Exemption Checklist
City of Redlands 47
on the intensity and types of construction activities occurring. In addition, the proposed Project would generate a need for construction worker vehicle trips to and from the Project site during the estimated 20 months of construction.

It is mandatory for all construction projects to comply with several SCAQMD Rules, including Rule 403 for controlling fugitive dust, PM10, and PM2.5 emissions from construction activities. Rule 403 requirements include, but are not limited to, applying water in sufficient quantities to prevent the generation of visible dust plumes, applying soil binders to uncovered areas, reestablishing ground cover as quickly as possible, utilizing a wheel washing system to remove bulk material from tires and vehicle undercarriages before vehicles exit the proposed project site, covering all trucks hauling soil with a fabric cover and maintaining a freeboard height of 12-inches, and maintaining effective cover over exposed areas.

In addition, implementation of SCAQMD Rule 1113 that governs the VOC content in architectural coating, paint, thinners, and solvents, would be required. As shown in Table 15, CalEEMod results provide that construction emissions generated by the proposed Project would not exceed SCAQMD regional thresholds.

Therefore, construction activities would result in a less than significant impact.

Table 15: Regional Construction Emissions

Maximum Daily Regional Emissions
(pounds/day)
ROG NOx CO SOx PM10 PM2.5
Maximum Daily
Emissions 59.80 34.00 26.30 0.12 7.81 3.30
SCAQMD Significance
Thresholds 75 100 550 150 150 55
Threshold Exceeded? No No No No No No
Source: Ganddini, 2023b (Appendix C)
Operational Emissions: Development and operation of the 164 residential units would result in long -term regional emissions of criteria air pollutants and ozone precursors associated with mobile sources (emissions from vehicle trips) and area (natural gas consumption, landscaping, applications of architectural coatings, and consumer products).

Operational emissions associated with the proposed Project were modeled using CalEEMod and are presented in Table 16. As shown, the proposed Project would result in long -term regional emissions of the criteria pollutants that would be below the SCAQMD’s applicable thresholds. Therefore, the proposed Project’s operational emissions would not exceed the NAAQS and CAAQS, would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant impacts, and would be less than significant.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
405 of 932
The Venue at Orange Project Phase 2
Class 32 CEQA Exemption Checklist
City of Redlands 48
Table 16: Regional Operational Emissions

Maximum Daily Regional Emissions
(pounds/day)
ROG NOx CO SOx PM10 PM2.5
Maximum Daily
Emissions 8.02 6.45 42.10 0.10 6.89 1.96
SCAQMD Significance
Thresholds 55 55 550 150 150 55
Threshold Exceeded? No No No No No No
Source: Ganddini, 2023b (Appendix C)
Localized Emissions: The SCAQMD recommends the evaluation of localized NO x, CO, PM 10, and PM 2.5 construction-related impacts to sensitive receptors in the immediate vicinity of the Project site. Such an evaluation is referred to as a localized significance threshold (LST) analysis. The impacts were analyzed pursuant to the SCAQMD’s Final Localized S ignificance Threshold Methodology. According to the LST Methodology, off-site mobile emissions from the Project should not be included in the emissions compared to the LSTs. SCAQMD has developed LSTs that represent the maximum emissions from a project that are not expected to cause or contribute to an exceedance of the most stringent applicable federal or state ambient air quality standards, and thus would not cause or contribute to localized air quality impacts. LSTs are developed based on the ambient concentrations of NOx, CO, PM 10, and PM2.5 pollutants for each of the 38
source receptor areas (SRAs) in the SCAB. The Project site is located in SRA 35, East San Bernardino Valley.

Sensitive receptors can include uses such as long -term health care facilities, rehabilitation centers, and retirement homes. Residences, schools, playgrounds, childcare centers, and athletic facilities can also be considered sensitive receptors. The nearest LST sensitive receptors to the Project site are the existing residences to the east, west, and north of the Project site; therefore, the 25-meter LST threshold was used to evaluate the proposed Project.

Construction LST. The localized thresholds from the mass rate look-up tables in SCAQMD’s Final Localized Significance Threshold Methodology document were developed for use on projects that are less than or equal to 5 -acres in size or have a disturbance of less than or equal to 5 acres daily and were used to evaluate LSTs. As shown in Table 17, with implementation of SCAQMD Rules 403 and 1113, the maximum daily construction emissions from the proposed Project would not exceed the applicable SCAQMD LST thresholds.

Table 17: Localized Construction Emissions
Construction Activity
Maximum Daily Regional Emissions
(pounds/day)
NOx CO PM10 PM2.5
Grading 15.90 15.40 3.54 2.02
Building Construction 11.20 11.90 0.46 0.42
Paving 6.13 8.21 0.27 0.25
Architectural Coating 0.88 1.14 0.03 0.03
SCAQMD Significance Thresholds 170 1,174 7 5
Threshold Exceeded? No No No No
Source: Ganddini, 2023b (Appendix C)
Operational LST. According to the SCAQMD LST methodology, LSTs apply to project -related stationary mobile sources. Projects that involve mobile sources that spend long periods queuing and idling at a site, such as transfer facilities or warehousing and distribution buildings, have the potential to exceed the operational LSTs. The Project proposes residential uses, which do not typically involve vehicles idling or queueing for long periods. Therefore, due to the lack of significant stationary source emissions, impacts related to operational LSTs would be less than significant.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
406 of 932
The Venue at Orange Project Phase 2
Class 32 CEQA Exemption Checklist
City of Redlands 49
Greenhouse Gas Emissions: The City of Redlands adopted the City of Redlands Climate Action Plan (CAP) on December 5, 2017 , which establishes a Year 2030 GHG emissions target of 6.0 MTCO2e per capita per year. In addition, the SCAQMD has proposed interim numeric GHG significance thresholds that are based on capture of approximately 90 percent of emissions from development, which is 3,000 metric tons carbon dioxide equivalent (MTCO2e) per year (SCAQMD 2008). SCAQMD’s approach is widely used by cities in the South Coast Air Basin, including the City of Redlands. As such, both thresholds are utilized herein to determine if GHG emissions from this Project would be significant. CalEEMod v. 2022.1.1 was used to calculate Project-generated emissions (Appendix C).

During construction, temporary sources of GHG emissions include construction equipment and workers’ commutes to and from the site. The combustion of fossil -based fuels creates GHGs such as CO 2, CH4, and N2O. As shown on Table 18, the proposed Project has the potential to generate a total of approximately

14.97 MTCO2e per year from construction emissions amortized over 30 years per SCAQMD methodology.

During operations, the proposed residences would generate long-term GHG emissions from vehicular trips; water, natural gas, and electricity consumption; and solid waste generation. Natural gas use results in the emission of 2 GHGs: CH 4 (the major component of natural gas) and CO 2 (from the combustion of natural gas). Electricity use can result in GHG production if the electricity is generated by combusting fossil fuel.

Table 18 shows the increase in operational GHG emissions that would result from operation of the 164 residential townhomes. The large majority of GHG emissions generated from the residences would be from vehicle trips. As shown in Table 18, Project operations would generate a maximum of approximately 1,600 MTCO2e per year. Summing the construction and operational emissions, the proposed Project would result in total GHG emissions of approximately 1,614.97 MTCO2e, which is below the SCAQMD threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e.

Using CalEEMod outputs, the proposed Project would result in approximately 543 residents. T hus, the proposed Project would generate approximately 2.97 MTCO2e per capita per year, which is below the Redlands CAP Year 2030 threshold of 6.0 MTCO2e per capita per year. Therefore, Project-related GHG impacts would be less than significant.

Table 18: Project Total GHG Emissions
Greenhouse Gas Emissions (Metric Tons/Year)
CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Maximum Annual Operations 1,543.00 1.38 0.07 1,600.00
Construction 14.70 0.00 0.00 14.97
Total Emissions 1,577.70 1.38 0.07 1,614.97
SCAQMD Draft Threshold for All Land Uses 3,000
Threshold Exceeded? No
MTCO2e per Service Population per Year 2.97
Redlands CAP Year 2030 Service Population Threshold per Capita per Year 6 Threshold Exceeded? No
Source: Ganddini, 2023b (Appendix C)
Overall, the proposed residential Project would not result in any significant effects relating to air quality or greenhouse gas emissions; therefore, the proposed Pr oject meets the air quality related criteria of CEQA Guidelines Section 15332(d).

WATER QUALITY
The Project site is within the Santa Ana River watershed and under the jurisdiction of the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (SARWQCB), which sets water quality standards for all ground and surface waters within its region. Water quality standards are defined under the Clean Water Act (CWA) to include both the beneficial uses of specific water bodies and the levels of water quality that must be met and maintained to protect those uses (water quality objectives). Water quality standards for all ground and Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
407 of 932
The Venue at Orange Project Phase 2
Class 32 CEQA Exemption Checklist
City of Redlands 50
surface waters overseen by the SARWQCB are documented in its Basin Plan, and the regulatory program of the SA RWQCB is designed to minimize and control discharges to surface and groundwater, largely through permitting, such that water quality standards are effectively attained.

Construction. Construction of the proposed P roject would require grading and excavation of soils, which would loosen sediment, and then have the potential to mix with surface water runoff and degrade water quality. Additionally, construction would use heavy equipment and construction- related chemicals, such as concrete, cement, asphalt, fuels, oils, antifreeze, transmission fluid, grease, solvents and paints. These potentially harmful materials could be accidentally spilled or improperly disposed of during construction and, if mixed with surface water runoff could wash into and pollute waters.

These types of water quality impacts during construction of the Project would be prevented through implementation of a stormwater pollution prevention plant (SWPPP). Construction of the Project would disturb more than one acre of soil; therefore, the proposed Project would be required to obtain coverage under the NPDES General Permit for Discharges of Storm Water Associated with Construction Activity. Construction activity subject to this permit includes clearing, grading, and ground dis turbances such as tr enching, stockpiling, or excavation. The Construction General Permit requires implementation of a SWPPP that is required to identify all potential sources of pollution that are reasonably expected to affect the quality of storm water discharges from the construction site. The SWPPP would generally contain a site map showing the construction perimeter, proposed buildings, stormwater collection and discharge points, general pre- and post-construction topography, drainage patterns across the site, and adjacent roadways. The SWPPP would also include construction Best Management Practices (BMPs) such as:
• Prompt revegetation of proposed landscaped areas;
• Perimeter gravel bags or silt fences to prevent off-site transport of sediment; • Storm drain inlet protection (filter fabric gravel bags and straw wattles), with gravel bag check dams within paved roadways;
• Regular sprinkling of exposed soils to control dust during construction and soil binders for forecasted wind storms;
• Specifications for construction waste handling and disposal; • Contained equipment wash-out and vehicle maintenance areas; • Erosion control measures including soil binders, hydro mulch, geotextiles, and hydro seeding of disturbed areas ahead of forecasted storms;
• Construction of stabilized construction entry/exits to prevent trucks from tracking sediment on City roadways;
• Construction timing to minimize soil exposure to storm events; and • Training of subcontractors on general site housekeeping.

Adherence to the existing requirements and implementation of the appropriate BMPs as ensured through the City’s construction permitting process would ensure that the Project would not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements, potential water quality degradation associated with construction activities would be minimized, and impacts would be less than significant.

Operations. The new residential uses would introduce pollutants such as chemicals from household cleaners, nutrients from fertilizer, pesticides and sediments from landscaping, trash and debris, and oil and grease from vehicles. These pollutants could potentially discharge into surface waters and result in degradation of water quality. Thus, the proposed Project would be required to comply with existing regulations that limit the potential for pollutants to discharge from the site.

The City of Redlands participates in t he San Bernardino County Municipal Storm Water Management Program, which requires implementation of a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) based on the anticipated pollutants that could result from a p roject. The WQMP prepared for the proposed Project (included as Appendix D) would include pollutant source and treatment control BMPs. In addition, the Project Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
408 of 932
The Venue at Orange Project Phase 2
Class 32 CEQA Exemption Checklist
City of Redlands 51
site would consist of three drainage management areas (DA-1 through DA-3). DA-1 and DA-2 would each install three underground pipe infiltration basins . Runoff would be conveyed to the existing 36 -inch storm drain within Orange Avenue. DA-3 would be left undeveloped, and runoff would be self-treated as the site was determined to consist of soils conducive to infiltration (Appendix D). The Hydrology Study prepared for the proposed Project (included as Appendix E ) determined that post -development conditions would adequately contain the volume of runoff produced from a 100 -year storm event. With implementation of the WQMP pursuant to the San Bernardino County Munici pal Storm Water Management Program , and subsequent verification during the plan check and permitting process, the Project would not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements, nor would it otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality.

Overall, the proposed residential Project would not result in any significant effects relating to water quality; therefore, the proposed P roject meets the water quality related criteria of CEQA Guidelines Section 15332(d).
e. Criterion Section 15332(e): Utilities: The site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services.

The utilities necessary to construct and operate the proposed Project (electric, natural gas, trash, water, and sewage) would be adequately provided by existing utility service systems. The Project site is located in an urbanized and developed area. The proposed Project would connect to existing utility service lines surrounding the Project site, within Orange Avenue and Alabama Street. Trash collection services would be arranged prior to the issuance of building permits. All service confirmations would be addressed prior to occupancy. Given the Project size and its location within an area that is currently served by utilities, the site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services. Therefore, the proposed Project meets the criteria of CEQA Guidelines Section 15332(e).

4.2 EXCEPTIONS FOR EXEMPTIONS
In addition to investigating the applicability of CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 (Class 32), this CEQA document also assesses whether any of the exceptions to qualifying for the Class 32 categorical exemption for an Infill Project are present. The following analysis compares the criteria of CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 (Exceptions) to the Project.
a. Criterion 15300.2(a): Location: Classes 3, 4, 5, 6, and 11 are qualified by c onsideration of where the project is to be located – a project that is ordinarily insignificant in its impact on the environment may in a particularly sensitive environment be significant. Therefore, these classes are considered to apply all instances, except where the project may impact on an environmental resource of hazardous or critical concern where designated, precisely mapped, and officially adopted pursuant to law by federal, state, or local agencies.

The Project does not qualify for an exemption under Classes 3, 4, 5, 6 or 11. The Project is located within an urban developed area and is not located within a sensitive environment. In addition, the Project would not result in any impacts on an environmental resource of hazardous or critical concern. Therefore, the exception under criterion 15300.2(a) is not applicable. b. Criterion 15300.2(b): Cumulative Impact: All exemptions for these classes are inapplicable when the cumulative impact of successive projects with similar uses over a similar geological area, over time is significant.

The effects of the proposed Project would generally be beneficial, as the proposed Project would create needed housing in the City of Redlands on an underutilized parcel of land . The proposed Project would redevelop a site that is currently vacant and heavily graded due to the residential development to the north.

The Project site is already served by utilities and public services, as well as transportation. Any construction effects would be temporary, confined to the Project vicinity, and reduced to a less than significant level by Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
409 of 932
The Venue at Orange Project Phase 2
Class 32 CEQA Exemption Checklist
City of Redlands 52
implementing existing applicable regulatory requirements. No successive projects of the same or similar use within the vicinity of the Project are known or expected to occur over time that would result in cumulatively considerable impacts. Furthermore, as discussed throughout this justification document, the proposed Project would not result in significant environmental impacts that would be capable of combining with impacts from other cumulative projects to result in a cumulative impact. Therefore, the exception under CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 (b) does not apply to the Project.
c. Criterion 15300.2(c): Significant Effects: A categorical exemption shall not be used for an activity where there is a reasonable possibility that the activity will have a significant effect on the environment due to unusual circumstances.

There are no known unusual circumstances that are applicable to the Project, and which may result in a significant effect on the environment. The proposed Project consists of the development of 164 residential units within a developed area that is served by utilities and transportation. The Project site would be consistent with the City’s General Plan and the Municipal Code. The provision of additional housing would not introduce a new activity to the area that could result in a significant effect on the environment. Therefore, the exception under CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2(c) does not apply to the Project. d. Criterion 15300.2(d): Scenic Highways: A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project which may result in damage to scenic resources, including but not limited to, trees, historic buildings, rock outcroppings, or similar resources, within a highway officially designated as a state scenic highway. This does not apply to improvements which are required as mitigation by an adopted negative declaration or certified EIR.

The Project site is not located within a state scenic highway corridor. The nearest Officially Designated State Scenic Highway to the Project site is the section of State Route 38 (SR-38) that runs across the San Bernardino Mountains (Caltrans, 2019). This portion of SR-38 is located over 23 miles northeast of the Project site and is not visible from the Project site. Therefore, the exception under CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2(d) does not apply to the Project.
e. Criterion 15300.2(e): Hazardous Waste Sites: Hazardous Waste Sites: A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project located on a site which is included on any list complied pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code.

The Project site is currently vacant and heavily graded. Based on a review of historic photographs, the site had previously been developed with two single- family residences. The site is not included on any lists compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code (CalEPA, 2023). f. Criterion 15300.2(f): Historical Resources: A categorical exemption shall not be used for a project which may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resources. As previously described, the Project site is vacant and heavily graded. In addition, mechanical excavations were conducted at the southern property line to determine if the historic Mill Creek Zanja channel is within the Project site boundary.

As documented in the Cultural Resources Trenching Report (included as Appendix F), trenching was performed on October 19, 2023, which did not locate any features or deposits of the Mill Creek Zanja or any other potentially significant resources. As such, the proposed Project would not result in impacts to historic resources.

Therefore, the exception under CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2(e) does not apply to the Project.

On the basis of the evidence provided above, the Project is eligible for a Class 32 Categorical Exemption in accordance with Section 15332, Infill Development Projects, of the CEQA Guidelines. Because the proposed Project meets the criteria for categorically exempt infill development projects listed in CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 and it would not have a significant effect on the environment, this analysis finds that a Notice of Exemption may be prepared for the Project.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
410 of 932
The Venue at Orange Project Phase 2
Class 32 CEQA Exemption Checklist
City of Redlands 53

REFERENCES
BCR Consulting, LLC. (2023). Results of a Cultural Resources Testing Program Utilizing Mechanical Trenching to Locate Remnants of the Historic Zanja. Appendix F.

CalEPA (California Environmental Protection Agency ). (2023). Cortese List Data Resources . Accessed December 2023 from: https://calepa.ca.gov/sitecleanup/corteselist/ Caltrans. (2019). California State Scenic Highway System Map. Accessed December 2023 from:
https://caltrans.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=465dfd3d807c46cc8e805 7116f1aacaa
City of Redlands. (2017). East Valley Corridor Specific Plan. Accessed February 2024 from:
https://www.cityofredlands.org/sites/main/files/file-atta chments/1_-_ev_- title_pg_and_document_updates_-_april_2018a.pdf?1553813716 City of Redlands. (2017). General Plan 2035. Accessed December 2023 from:
https://www.cityofredlands.org/post/planning-division-general-plan Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC). (2023). EnviroStor. Accessed December 2023 from:
https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/map/
Ganddini Group, Inc (Ganddini). (2023a). Venue II at Orange Project Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Screening Assessment Project No. 19567. Appendix A.

Ganddini Group, Inc (Ganddini). (2023b). Venue II at Orange Air Quality and Global Climate Change Impact Analysis. Appendix C.

SCAG (Southern California Association of Governments). (2020). Demographics and Growth Forecast.

Accessed December 2023 from: https://scag.ca.gov/sites/main/files/file- attachments/0903fconnectsocal_demographics-and-growth-forecast.pdf?1606001579 Transtech Engineers, Inc. (2023a). Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan for Luxview Venue II Apartments. Appendix D.

Transtech Engineers, Inc. (2023b). Preliminary Drainage Study for Luxview Venue II Apartments. Appendix E.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
411 of 932
1 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8629 Approving Parcel Map No. 20796 -Commission Review & Approval No. 914 Rev. 1 (Venue at Orange).docx-msv3 RESOLUTION NO. 8629

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDLANDS APPROVING PARCEL MAP NO. 20796, COMMISSION REVIEW & APPROVAL NO. 914, REVISION 1 , AND ASSOCIATED AGREEMENTS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF 164 APARTMENT UNITS

WHEREAS, Miller Architectural Corporation (the “Applicant”) has submitted an application for Parcel Map No. 20 796 to subdivide a 9.2-acre site into t wo parcels (Parcel 1 at approximately 5.9 gross acres, and Parcel 2 at approximately 3.2 gross acres ) for development purposes, located on the south side of Orange Avenue and west of Alabama Street (APN: 0292-482- 01-0000) (the “Project” or “Project Entitlements”); and

WHEREAS, the Applicant has submitted an application for Commission Review & Approval No. 914, Revision No. 1, for the construction of a 164 -unit multi -family apartment complex on Parcel 2 of Parcel Map No. 20796, including onsite parking and recreation areas; and

WHEREAS, the Applicant has filed an application for a Density Bonus Agreement to construct an additional 164 density bonus units including fifty (50) very low-income units for a total of 492 dwelling units within the total project located between Iowa Street and Alabama Street on the north and south sides of Orange Avenue, (APNs: 0292-482-01-0000, 0292-721-01-0000, 0292-721- 02-0000); and

WHEREAS, the Applicant is requesting an incentive through the Density Bonus Agreement, which includes a request for financial assistance to offset the cost of development impact fees in the amount of $1,500,000 requiring approval of a Loan Agreement and Development Impact Fee Deferral Agreement for the construction of 164 density bonus units; and

WHEREAS, the proposed project qualifies for exemption from environmental review pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines , Section 15332 (In-Fill Development Projects); and

WHEREAS notice of the Planning Commission’s public hearing for the Project and related Project Entitlements was published in a newspaper of general circulation and notices were mailed to property owners within a 300-foot radius; and

WHEREAS, on June 25 , 2024, the Planning Commission held a public hearing and considered the staff report, oral report, the testimony and the written evidence submitted by staff, the applicant and by members of the public; and

WHEREAS, following the public hearing on J une 25 , 2024, the Planning Commission determined that approval of the proposal is in the best interests of the public health, safety , and general welfare and recommended approval of the project entitlements; and

WHEREAS, on June 25, 2024, the Planning Commission recommended to the City Council that the project entitlements be approved; and

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
412 of 932
2 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8629 Approving Parcel Map No. 20796 -Commission Review & Approval No. 914 Rev. 1 (Venue at Orange).docx-msv3 WHEREAS, notice of the City Council’s public hearing for the Project was published in a newspaper of general circulation and notices were mailed to property owners within a 300-foot radius by the City Clerk; and

WHEREAS, on October 1, 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 testimony by members of the public.

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

SECTION 1. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT. The proposed project is exempt from environmental review in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, Section 15332 (In-Fill Development Projects) of the CEQA Guidelines. There is no information or evidence that the proposed project may res ult in any potentially significant environmental effects, and the proposal satisfies all applicable criteria for exemption in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15332.

SECTION 2. SOCIO-ECONOMIC COST/BENEFIT STUDY. The Socio-Economic Cost/Benefit Study prepared by City staff found that the proposed project would not create any significant unmitigable physical blight or overburden public services in the community and is hereby approved based upon the following findings:

A. The Project will not create unmitigated physical blight within the City or overburden public services including, without limitation, the sufficiency of Police and Fire Protection services.

The Project will not create significant unmitigable physical blight in the City of Redlands (“City”) or overburden public services, including without limitation police and fire protection services . The Project developer will make improvements to facilitate implementation of the Project, including the construction of any necessary adjacent roadway improvements along the project frontage and the Project would fund and provide connections to existing City infrastructure. Conditions of approval on the project require t he Project developer to fund the project’s fair share allocation of any necessary public infrastructure associated with development of the Project.

B. The benefits to the City resulting from development of the Project outweigh any direct cost to the City that may result.

The Socio -Economic Cost/Benefit Study demonstrates that the Project will generate “new net” annual revenues of approximately $141,542 and approximately $ 107,219 in costs, and therefore will result in a positive balance of $34,321 (or cost/benefit ratio of +1.28). For every dollar the City spends in providing services to the Project, the City will receive $1.28 in “new net” revenue. The Project would provide for the development of 164 new residential units. The project also provides 50 very -low-income afford able housing units. Schools will be enhanced with the payment of school fees. Further, with Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
413 of 932
3 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8629 Approving Parcel Map No. 20796 -Commission Review & Approval No. 914 Rev. 1 (Venue at Orange).docx-msv3 the additional revenue provided to the City through increased property tax assessment, indirect funding will be provided for cultural enhancements, downtown district enhancements, public safety (Police and Fire) enhancements, and traffic enhancements.

SECTION 3. FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL OF PARCEL MAP NO. 20796. The proposed Parcel Map No. 20796 is hereby approved based upon the following findings, and subject to the Conditions of Approval attached hereto as Exhibit “A” and Exhibit “B”:

1. The proposed map is consistent with the General Plan or any applicable specific plan, or other applicable provisions of the Redlands Municipal Code.

The proposed map will be consistent with the Redlands General Plan and the Redlands Municipal Code. The proposed subdivision is within the Medium -Density Residential land use designation of the General Plan. The existing zoning designation is Multiple -Family Residential (EV/2500) district of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan, which is consistent with the General Plan land use designation. The subdivision is consistent with the development standards of the underlying zoning district in terms require lot size, width and depth and is supported by the General Plan policies outlined in the staff report.

2. The site is physically suitable for the proposed type of development.

The project site is physically suitable for the proposed developments. The existing site is approximately 3.2 acres. The site is generally flat and rectangular. All on -site and off -site improvements proposed as part of the project’s design will meet all Ci ty standards with the approval of a Density Bonus Agreement with Declaration of Affordable Housing Covenants and Restrictions and will provide a safe and efficient environment for the future residents after development.

3. The site is physically suitable for the density of the development.

The property is located within the medium Density Residential land use designation of the General Plan. This land use designation is intended for the development of properties of up to 15 dwelling units per acre. The project exceeds this density; however, it is consistent with the allowable density allowed based upon the State Density Bonus Law, while still providing outdoor recreation areas amenities and required parking.

4. The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat.

The design of the subdivision and proposed improvements is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. The project is located within an urbanized area and is surrounded by residential and non -residential development on all side. An exemption checklist was prepared to fully analyze the project in relation to CEQA guidelines criteria for an exemption based on Section 15332. Based upon the analysis in the checklist, the proposed project will not have any po tentially significant effect on the environment and is eligible for exemption from CEQA.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
414 of 932
4 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8629 Approving Parcel Map No. 20796 -Commission Review & Approval No. 914 Rev. 1 (Venue at Orange).docx-msv3

5. The design of the subdivision or the type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems.

The design of the subdivision or the type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems. The project is located in an area primarily developed by residential uses. The project is designed with improvements that meets all City and S tate building and fire codes, no offensive emissions or odors will be associated with the residential development.

6. The design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision.

The design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of the property within the proposed subdivision. The Parcel Map provides the necessary easements utilitie s and access and is responsible for installing or repairing associated street improvements such as curb, gutter, and sidewalk consistent with the City requirements, if necessary at the time of construction.

7. That pursuant to Section 66474.4 of the Subdivision Map Act, the land is not subject to a contract entered into pursuant to the California Land Conservation Act of 1965 (commencing with section 51200 of the Government Code) and that the resulting parcels following a subdivision of the land would be too small to sustain their agricultural use.

The subject property is not under a Williamson Act Contract pursuant to the California Land Conservation Act of 1965 and will not be detrimental or otherwise affect lands in agricultural use.

SECTION 4. FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL OF REVISION 1 TO COMMISSION REVIEW & APPROVAL NO. 914. Revision 1 to Commission Review & Approval No. 914 is hereby approved based upon the following findings, and subject to the Conditions of Approval attached hereto as Exhibit “A” and Exhibit “B”:

1. The site for the intended use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the use, and all of the required yards, setbacks, walls or fences, landscaping and other features will adjust the use to those existing or permitted future uses of land in the neighborhood.

The proposed project includes the construction of three four -story multifamily residential buildings with a total of 164 dwelling units, outdoor recreation areas, and related site improvements on approximately 3.2 acres. The subject property is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the proposed use, including setbacks, landscaping, private and common open space, recreation amenities, driveways, on -site parking, lighting, utilities, and other required improvements necessary to serve the proposed use and structures. The proposed project complies with the development standards for the EV2500 District of the East Valley Corridor Specific Plan to the maximum extent utilizing waivers as allowed by State Density Bonus Law and will be compatible with the adjacent residential uses that surround the project site.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
415 of 932
5 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8629 Approving Parcel Map No. 20796 -Commission Review & Approval No. 914 Rev. 1 (Venue at Orange).docx-msv3

2. The site for the proposed use relates to streets and highways which are properly designed and improved to carry the type and quantity of traffic generated or to be generated by the proposed use.

The subject property will take access from City streets (Orange Avenue and Alabama Street), which have been designed to accommodate the expected type and quantity of motor vehicle traffic to and from the proposed project. The existing roadways are designed to carry the type and quantity of residential traffic to be generated by the proposed use, including existing traffic from the existing portions of the project. The site for the proposed use relates to streets that are properly designed and improved to carry the type and quantity of traffic that will be generated by the proposed residential structures.

3. The conditions set forth in the approval and those shown on the approved site plan are deemed necessary to protect the public health, safety and general welfare.

The conditions of approval for the project will protect the public health, safety, and general welfare. Conditions are provided from the Planning Division, Building & Safety Division, and Land Use Engineering Division. The project has been conditioned to c omply with the applicable provisions of the Redlands Municipal Code as well as the applicable California Building Code, California Fire Code, and any other applicable regulations.

SECTION 5. APPROVAL OF DENSITY BONUS AGREEMENT. The proposed Density Bonus Agreement for the proposed project is hereby approved based upon the following findings:

1. The development project would not be a hazard or nuisance to the city at large or establish a use or development inconsistent with the goals and policies of the city's general plan.

Including the 164 density bonus units, the completed project will include 492 dwelling units, which will not be a hazard or nuisance to the City of Redlands at large. The proposed project and land use will be consistent with several policies and actions contained in the General Plan. The proposed project will also implement several goals and policies co ntained in the 2021-2029 Housing Element, particularly for increased density for sites identified in the Housing Sites Inventory and affordable housing. The proposed project will help the City achieve its housing goal numbers as determined by the Regional Housing Needs Assessment as further explained in the Housing Element.

2. The number of dwellings can be accommodated by existing and planned infrastructure capacities.

Including the 164 density bonus units, the proposed project will include 492 apartment units which can be accommodated by existing and planned infrastructure. The City’s Development Review Committee (including Land Use Engineering staff and Municipal Utilities & Engineering Department) have reviewed the proposed project plans, and all necessary infrastructure, public and private utilities, and public services will be able to adequately serve the project site and vicinity.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
416 of 932
6 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8629 Approving Parcel Map No. 20796 -Commission Review & Approval No. 914 Rev. 1 (Venue at Orange).docx-msv3

3. Adequate evidence exists to ensure that the development of the property would result in the provision of affordable housing in a manner consistent with the purpose and intent of this chapter;

The proposed project is consistent with the applicable provisions of State density bonus law (Calif. Gov. Code Sections 65915 – 65918) and the project is subject to a Density Bonus Agreement that is included in the project entitlements. The development of the property will result in the provision of 50 affordable housing units for very -low-income households in a manner consistent with the purpose and intent of the Redlands Municipal Code as well as applicable State law.

4. In the event that the city does not grant at least one financial concession or incentive as defined in state law in addition to the density bonus, that additional concessions or incentives are not necessary to ensure affordable housing costs; and

Through the approval of the Loan Agreement for this project, the City is providing one financial incentive, and therefore this finding can be met.

5. There are sufficient provisions to guarantee that the lower and very low income units would remain affordable in the future.

The proposed project includes a Density Bonus Agreement that will ensure the project provides housing for very -low-income households in accordance with the granted density bonus and applicable State law for 55 years. The Density Bonus Agreement includes terms and provisions to ensure that only eligible very -low-income residents may reside in the affordable housing units within the development and have the benefit of affordable rents.

SECTION 6. APPROVAL OF “LOAN AGREEMENT AND DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE DEFERRAL AGREEMENT.” The requested Loan Agreement and Development Impact Fee Deferral Agreement for the proposed project is hereby approved.

SECTION 7. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Resolution shall take effect upon adoption.

ADOPTED, SIGNED AND APPROVED this 1st day of October, 2024.

______________________________
Eddie Tejeda, Mayor
ATTEST:

_____________________________
Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
417 of 932
7 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8629 Approving Parcel Map No. 20796 -Commission Review & Approval No. 914 Rev. 1 (Venue at Orange).docx-msv3 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 1st day of October, 2024, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAINED:

______________________________
Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
418 of 932
8 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8629 Approving Parcel Map No. 20796 -Commission Review & Approval No. 914 Rev. 1 (Venue at Orange).docx-msv3

EXHIBIT A

DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL

VENUE AT ORANGE - PHASE 2 PROJECT
(Parcel Map No. 20796, Commission Review & Approval No. 914 Revision No. 1)

Planning Division

1. This permit/approval is for Parcel Map No. 20 796, and Commission Review & Approval No. 914 Revision No. 1 to subdivide a 9.2-acre site into two parcels Parcel 1, 5.9 gross acres and Parcel 2, 3.2 gross acres in size for the construction of a 164-unit multi-family apartment complex comprised of three four-story residential apartment buildings located on the south side of Orange Avenue, west of Alabama Street (APN: 0292-482-01-0000).

2. This permit/approval shall expire two (2) years from the date of project approval (will expire on June 25, 2026), unless construction has commenced pursuant to a building or engineering permit(s), or a time extension is granted in accordance with the Redlands Municipal Code (RMC Section 18.12.090 for Commission Review & Approval; and RMC Sections

17.07.110 and 17.07.120 for Subdivision Regulations).

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

4. 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 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 appli cant, to revoke all entitlements granted for the project pursuant to this permit. The City shall have no liability to the applicant for the exercise of City’s right to revoke this permit.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
419 of 932
9 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8629 Approving Parcel Map No. 20796 -Commission Review & Approval No. 914 Rev. 1 (Venue at Orange).docx-msv3

5. By signing and /or using this permit, the permittee acknowledges all of the conditions imposed and accepts this permit subject to those conditions and with full awareness of the applicable provisions of the Redlands Municipal Code including Title 15 (Buildings and Construction), Title 16 (General Plan), Title 17 (Subdivision Regulations), and Title 18 (Zoning Regulations). Failure of the permittee to sign these conditions does not affect their enforceability by the City or other responsible entity. These conditions are binding upon all future property owners and occupants of the subject property.

6. This permit/approval is granted for the project plans on file with the Development Services Department.

7. Prior to the issuance of building permits for the project, an Affordable Housing Agreement and Density Bonus Agreement, in a form approved by the City, shall be recorded against the Inclusionary Units or the Residential Development in its entirety, as deemed appropriate by the City Manager in consultation with the City Attorney. The Affordable Housing and Density Bonus Agreement(s) shall ensure that the applicant and/or developer develops the required Inclusionary Housing Units and satisfies all other terms of the Inclusionary Housing Plan, State Density Bonus Law, and the Redlands Municipal Code.

8. Developer shall prepare a management plan for the Affordable Units that provides for the implementation of the requirements in the Density Bonus Agreement, including but not limited to the marketing of the Affordable Units, tenant selection criteria and process, waiting list management, verification of income, setting utility allowances for Affordable Rent, and any other matter related to management of the Affordable Units (“Management Plan”). The Management Plan shall be submitted to the Development Services Department for review by the Planning Commission and approval by the City Manager, or its designee, prior to a first request for a Certificate of Occupancy on the Density Bonus Units.**

** Added by the Planning Commission on June 25, 2024.

9. The issuance of any permits shall comply with all applicable provisions of the Redlands Municipal Code

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

11. No Certificate of Occupancy shall be granted for a building or phase, or building permit shall receive final approval and signature, until all applicable Conditions of Approval have been satisfied for that building or phase.

12. The final map s shall substantially conform to the tentative map s as recommended by the Planning Commission.

13. A copy of the approved Conditions of Approval shall be included on the cover page of the construction plans submitted to the Building Division
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
420 of 932
10 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8629 Approving Parcel Map No. 20796 -Commission Review & Approval No. 914 Rev. 1 (Venue at Orange).docx-msv3

14. The applicant shall comply with all applicable federal, state, and local laws. Violations or convictions of any of those laws in connection with the use may be cause for revocation of this permit.

15. All off-site and on-site utilities shall be placed underground. Prior to approval of the final map the applicant shall submit plans to be approved by the Municipal Utilities and Engineering Director and the Development Services Director, that detail undergrounding of all utilities for the project.

16. Transformer cabinets and gas meters shall not be located within required setbacks and/or adjacent to public streets, and shall be screened from public view either by architectural treatment or with landscaping. Multiple electrical meters and panels shall b e 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 thi s equipment shall be shown on the construction plans and landscape plans prior to building permit issuance. Location of said equipment shall be coordinated with the appropriate utility company (i.e., Southern California Gas Company or Southern California Edison Company). The applicant shall submit plans showing details of screening subject to review and approval by the Development Services Director, prior to issuance of building permits

17. The applicant shall be required to submit a lighting plan to the Development Services Director for review and approval prior to the issuance of any building permits. The plan must include details such as beam spreads and/or photometric calculations that do not exceed the value one-half (0.5) foot candle of illumination at the property line, location and type of fixtures, exterior colors, details on the foundation, and arrangement of exterior lighting.

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

19. Prior to issuance of building permits, Developer shall demonstrate that light poles will not conflict with tree locations. Developer shall submit a plan showing both the lighting and landscape on the same sheet. Fixtures on exterior light poles shall direct lighting downward (e.g., contain a flat lens and/or have shielding that directs light downward and contains glare).

20. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit plans detailing that roof screening is of adequate height to screen any roof -top equipment from public view on all sides, subject to review and approval by the Development Services Direct or. Screening of air conditioning units and other equipment on the buildings shall be incorporated into or compatible with the architectural design of the buildings. All equipment shall be screened from public view of adjacent roadways and freeways. Plum bing vents, ducts and other appurtenances protruding from the roof of structures shall be placed so that they will not be visible from the front of the property or other major public vantage points. Developer shall include a note on the construction plumbi ng drawings of exterior elevations to indicate to contractors that roof features shall be grouped and located in the described manner. Roof vents shall be shown on construction drawings and painted to match roof material color.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
421 of 932
11 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8629 Approving Parcel Map No. 20796 -Commission Review & Approval No. 914 Rev. 1 (Venue at Orange).docx-msv3

21. Any gutters, downspouts, pipes, and other drainage appurtenances shall be designed and shall be placed (e.g., internal to the building or inside the exterior walls) so that they will not be visible from the front of the property (i.e., from public right -of-way) or other major public vantage points.

22. Utility meters shall be fully screened and incorporated into the overall architectural design of the building (e.g., interior room, cabinet with wing wall, or equivalent complete screening). Any enclosures or screening shall be architecturally treated to match the exterior of the attached structure.

23. If any bollards or similar devices are used along street frontages or interior drive aisles, then the bollards or the equivalent shall be decorative in nature and subject to review and approval by the Development Services Director or designee in Plan Check prior to permit issuance. If any steel bollards or pour -in-place bollards are installed, they shall only be installed for protecting utility devices (e.g., transformers above-ground) and shall be painted a dark color (e.g., dark green, brown, or black) to blend with surrounding landscape screening.

24. Telecommunications and television equipment or satellite dishes shall not be located on the exterior of any building (including but not limited to balconies, patios, exterior railings, rooflines, etc.). Dwelling units shall be internally wired for all avai lable utility and telecommunications services, with service devices, panels, or meters located within a centralized equipment room. The equipment room(s) in each building shall be fully enclosed and incorporated into the overall architectural design of the building(s). Any satellite dishes/receivers shall only be located on the roof and shall be completely screened from public view on all sides.

25. Where any public sidewalks are adjacent to slopes or parkways with slopes (e.g., downslopes), a 6” concrete curb may be required to be constructed with the sidewalk. Hand railings or guard rails should be avoided, if feasible. Prior to permit issuance, Developer shall identify any areas with slopes and parkways on the civil plans and identify construction of a 6” concrete curb as-needed.

26. Prior to issuance of any building or engineering permit for any building or phase of the project, the Developer shall prepare and submit a Construction Parking Management Plan for all contractors, workers, and deliveries related to the project site. The Co nstruction Parking Management Plan shall identify areas of the project site, surrounding private properties (with property owner’s authorization), and surrounding public streets that construction personnel may utilize. Deliveries of construction materials, equipment, trailers, vehicles, etc., shall be performed on the project site to the extent practicable, and avoid the use of public streets and rights -of-way if possible. The Developer and/or on -site primary general contractor (superintendent) shall have r esponsibility for monitoring and enforcing the approved parking management plan. The plan shall be subject to review and approval by the City Planner or designee, and may be modified by the City after approval to mitigate any unanticipated impacts or public nuisance conditions.

27. Prior to any use of any public street or right -of-way for construction -related activities, the Developer shall submit and receive approval for a Traffic Control Plan. Developer shall be Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
422 of 932
12 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8629 Approving Parcel Map No. 20796 -Commission Review & Approval No. 914 Rev. 1 (Venue at Orange).docx-msv3 responsible for repairing, replacing, or financially compensating any damages to public rights-of-way (including but not limited to paving, sidewalks, driveways, curbs and gutters, storm drain facilities, parkway landscape, street trees, public utilities, etc.) to the satisfaction of the Director(s) of the Municipal Utilities & Engineering Department and/or the Facilities & Community Services Department, or their designee(s), as applicable.

28. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for a building or phase, Developer shall remove all construction materials and vehicles from the subject property.

29. Developer shall arrange for materials collection during construction, demolition, and occupancy with the City's Solid Waste Division, or Developer shall arrange for self-hauling to an authorized facility.

30. Prior to placing or constructing any signs on the project property, Developer shall obtain a sign permit from the City. Sign locations and illumination are subject to review and approval by the Planning Division under separate permit.

31. Bicycle Facilities: The Developer shall install bicycle racks or secured lockers at a rate of one per thirty (30) parking spaces with a minimum of a three (3) space bicycle rack in accordance with RMC Section 18.224.020(A). Plans submitted to Plan Check sh all include information and specifications to verify this requirement has been met.

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

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

34. 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.

35. Landscape and Irrigation Plans shall be approved prior to the issuance of building permits.

Landscape and Irrigation shall be submitted for plan check to the Development Services Department, Building & Safety Division, for distribution to other departments and for review and approval by the Development Services Director. Plans shall be in compliance with the Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance No. 2724 (Also known as Chapter 15.54 of the RMC).

36. All construction activities shall be limited to the hours between 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., and no construction activities permitted on Sundays and Federal Holidays.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
423 of 932
13 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8629 Approving Parcel Map No. 20796 -Commission Review & Approval No. 914 Rev. 1 (Venue at Orange).docx-msv3

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

Subdivision Conditions (Parcel Map No. 20796):

38. Parcel Map No. 20796 authorizes the subdivision of a 9.2-acre site into two parcels Parcel 1,

5.9 gross acres and Parcel 2, 3.2 gross acres in size, for development purposes located on the south side of Orange Avenue, west of Alabama Street (APN: 0292-482-01-0000)

39. This Parcel Map shall expire two (2) years or 24 months from the date of project approval, unless the Final Map has been recorded or a time extension is granted in accordance with the Redlands Municipal Code pursuant to RMC Sections 17.07.110 and 17.07.120 (Subdivision Regulations).

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

41. The applicant shall record the subdivision by a Final Parcel Map. The Final Parcel Map(s) shall comply with the Subdivision Map Act and the Redlands Municipal Code (RMC).

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

43. The Final Parcel Map(s) shall be in substantial conformance with the Parcel Map and plans submitted by the applicant and placed on file in the office of the Planning Division.

Building Division

44. When the Entitlement Review is approved submit complete construction drawings including structural calculations, soils report, 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.

45. Disabled access for the site and buildings must be in accordance with the State of California and ADA regulations. All dwelling units shall be adaptable and on an accessible route.

46. Where public funds/loans are provided/used the project will be defined as public housing in regard to accessibility and shall comply with CBC 11B. 5% of the total number of dwelling units shall be mobility dwellings, 2% of the total number of dwelling uni ts shall be communication dwellings, and all ground floor non -mobility dwelling units shall be adaptable and on an accessible route.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
424 of 932
14 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8629 Approving Parcel Map No. 20796 -Commission Review & Approval No. 914 Rev. 1 (Venue at Orange).docx-msv3

47. Accessible EVC parking spaces for future and required EVCS as per the California Green Code is required.

Facilities and Community Services Department

48. The City maintains a list of acceptable street trees by species, by street name, and by tree district, pursuant to RMC 12.52.050. Street trees for public streets adjacent to the project must be selected from this approved list.

49. Prior to issuance of any buildings permits for any building, the Developer shall prepare and submit a Trash Management Plan development. The plan shall provide estimates of trash generation, estimates for the numbers and sizes of containers and facilities, schedule for City services, pertinent instructions for on -site maintenance staff (e.g., bins and containers shall not be placed on public streets and left unattended outdoors for more than two hours before or after trash service pick-up, bins and containers shall not be placed or staged in a manner that obstructs any vehicle travel lanes, etc.), and other necessary information as required by the City. The plan shall be subject to review and approval by the Facilities & Community Services Department and the Development Services Department, and may be modified by the City after approval to mitigate any unanticipated impacts or public nuisance conditions.

a. Each building and building pad shall be designed to accommodate all necessary refuse storage rooms, bins and containers, hallways, access paths, and other structural elements to be completely screened or enclosed. Refuse and recycling storage rooms and all bins or containers shall be completely screened from view from any streets (when not placed outdoors for scheduled pick-up and hauling).

Fire Department

50. Fire Department Access & Water Supply (Fire Master Plan):

a. Fire Department Access & Water Supply plan is required to be formally submitted to Redlands Fire Department as a separate permit application prior to grading & building permits.

b. Alternative Means & Methods Proposal: Project has held preliminary discussions with Redlands Fire Department regarding performance based equivalent level of prescriptive code design features for emergency vehicle access and fire hose coverage. These perform ance based equivalent compliance features include an automatic fire sprinkler system designed to the higher level of protection provided by NFPA 13 for Building 5, as well as additional fire hose standpipe connections for Buildings S2, S4, & S5. At this p reliminary stage Alternative Means & Methods Proposal has demonstrated sufficient compliance to proceed in the design process, details and specifics will be finalized in the formal Alternative Means & Methods submittal.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
425 of 932
15 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8629 Approving Parcel Map No. 20796 -Commission Review & Approval No. 914 Rev. 1 (Venue at Orange).docx-msv3 Review Note: Preliminary Site Fire Master included in project packet accounts for major aspects of the Fire Department Access & Water Supply plan. Details and specifics to be reviewed in the separate permit identified above.

51. Onsite Fire Protection Water Supply Distribution - Looped Design:

Acknowledging the firefighting challenges associated with electric vehicle fires and their involved hazardous materials, Redlands Fire Department is participating in the nationwide dialogue regarding the appropriate infrastructure and tactics needed to provide adequate level of fire protection services for surface parking areas.

a. At this preliminary stage, Fire Department condition is to provide a looped design for the on-site fire protection water supply to serve the private fire hydrant adjacent to Building S4. Redlands Fire Department staff will further evaluate and coordinate with the project design professionals for a final determination prior the plan review and permitting phase.

52. Building Fire Protection Systems & Hydraulic Analysis Report:

Building Fire Protection Systems & Hydraulic Analysis Report included in this submittal is acknowledged. (File Title: The Venue Phase II - Fire Sprinkler Analysis Report -

4.11.24.pdf)

a. Fire hose standpipe connections are required to be ‘wet’ design per 2022 CA Fire Code 905.8.

53. Fuels Management and Weed Abatement : From the present time until project construction phase, property owner is responsible to maintain compliance with Redlands Municipal Code Chapter 8.40 regarding Weed Abatement and Fuels Management.

a. Weeds and annual grasses shall be maintained at four (4) inches of growth or less. b. Tumbleweeds and similar uncultivated vegetation shall be removed.

Other City Departments/Divisions:

54. 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 10/01/24
426 of 932
16 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8629 Approving Parcel Map No. 20796 -Commission Review & Approval No. 914 Rev. 1 (Venue at Orange).docx-msv3

EXHIBIT B

LAND USE ENGINEERING DIVISION

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL

[ Attached ]

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
427 of 932
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
428 of 932
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
429 of 932
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
430 of 932
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
431 of 932
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
432 of 932
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
433 of 932
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
434 of 932
City Council Meeting L. 1.

DATE: 10/01/2024
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
SUBJECT: Consideration of the Amended and Restated City Manager Employment Agreement between the City of Redlands and Charles M. Duggan, Jr. (Mayor Tejeda and Mayor Pro Tem Barich)
MOTION(S):

If the City Council determines the recommendation is appropriate, the following motion is provided:

I move to approve the Amended and Restated City Manager Employment Agreement between the City of Redlands and Charles M. Duggan, Jr.

RECOMMENDATION:

To approve the Amended and Restated Employment Agreement between the City of Redlands and Charles M. Duggan, Jr.

DISCUSSION:

Charles M. Duggan, Jr. has dutifully served as the City Manager since January 2020. The current Employment Agreement with the City Manager expires on January 31, 2026. The City Council wishes to amend the City Manager’s contract prior to its expiration. It is proposed that the City Council approve an Amended and Restated Employment Agreement, which proposes the following terms.

Term of the employment agreement extended to January 31, 2028.1.

Base salary increases in accordance with the following schedule:

Effective January 15, 2025, annual base salary shall increase to Three Hundred Twenty Thousand Dollars ($320,000).
a.

Effective the first payroll period following July 1, 2025, Employee will receive a one percent (1%) increase to his Salary over the prior year. b.

2. Other terms as set forth in the current contract remain unchanged.3.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
435 of 932

This report complies with Government Code Section 54953(c)(3).

ALTERNATIVES:

The City Council may elect not to approve the Agreement and provide alternative direction to staff.

STRATEGIC PLAN:

N/A.

SUBMITTED BY:

Mayor Eddie Tejeda and Mayor Pro Tem Paul T. Barich
REVIEWED BY:

Charles M. Duggan, Jr.

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

Janice McConnell
Fiscal Impact
Fiscal Year: 2025
Revenue Generating: No
Appropriation Required Y/N: No
Amount: 14,408
Discussion:

The amended and restated agreement represents an increase in base pay of $14,408. Other benefits tied to base salary will be adjusted accordingly and their impacts are minimal.

Attachments
City Manager Employment Agreement
City Manager Employment Agreement Redline
Salary Survey
2023 California Government Compensation
2023 Controllers Report by Total Wages
2023 Controllers Report by Population
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
436 of 932
1 CITY OF REDLANDS

AMENDED AND RESTATED CITY MANAGER EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT

This Amended and Restated City Manager Employment Agreement (this “Agreement”) is made and entered into the 1st day of October , 2024 (“Effective Date”) by and between the City of Redlands, a general law city and municipal corporation (“City”) and Charles M. Duggan Jr., an individual (“Employee”). For purposes of this Agreement, City and Employee are sometimes individually referred to herein as a “Party” and, together, as the “Parties.”

RECITALS

WHEREAS, Employee has dutifully served as City Manager since January 2020; and

WHEREAS, it is the desire of City to continue to retain the services of Employee as City Manager and the desire of the Employee to serve in that capacity; and

WHEREAS, Government Code section 34852 provides that an ordinance establishing a city manager form of government shall define the powers and duties of the city manager; and

WHEREAS, the duties of the city manager of the City are set forth in full in Chapter 2.04 of the Redlands Municipal Code (”RMC”); and

WHEREAS, RMC section 2.04.010 states: “The City Manager shall be appointed by the City Council solely on the basis of his executive and administrative qualifications and ability, and shall hold office at and during the pleasure of the City Council;” and

WHEREAS, it is the desire of City to: (1) provide inducement for Employee to remain in City’s employment; (2) make possible full work productivity by providing Employee with assurances regarding his employment; and (3) provide an equitable process for term inating Employee’s services if that should occur; and

WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Redlands (“City Council”) has determined that Employee has the required executive and administrative qualifications and ability, along with the level of education, experience, skills and expertise to serve as the City Manager of the City; and

WHEREAS, it is the desire of the City Council to amend and restate the terms and conditions of the Agreement.

NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the mutual promises contained herein, the Parties agree as follows:

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
437 of 932
2 AGREEMENT

1. Employment and Duties

1.1 Duties. The City Council hereby appoints Employee as the City Manager for the City to perform the functions and duties of that position, as described in the California Government Code and Chapter 2.04 of the Redlands Municipal Code (as such Chapter may be amended from time to time in the sole discretion of the City Council without any amendment of this Agreement or Employee’s acquiescence), and such other legally permissible and proper duties and functions as the City Council shall, from time to time, direct or assign to Employee. Employee agrees to perform all such functions and duties to the best of his ability and in an efficient, competent, and ethical manner.

1.2 Term. The City hereby employs Employee as City Manager on an at-will basis remaining in effect until January 31, 2028.

1.3 Work Schedule. Employee will report to the entire City Council. It is recognized that Employee is expected to engage in the hours of work that are necessary to fulfill the obligations of the position of City Manager, must be available at all times and devote significant time outside of “normal” City office hours to the business of the City . Employee acknowledges that proper performance of the duties of the City Manager will require Employee to generally observe normal business hours (currently 7:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m., Monday through Friday in accordance with City’s “9/80” work schedule), as set by the City and as may be duly revised from time-to-time by the City, and will also often require the performance of necessary services outside of normal business hours. Employee may bank Fridays worked while City Hall is closed for up to four months. Employee is pre-authorized to work remotely, for periods of time not exceeding two- weeks, four times each year. Employee’s compensation (whether salary or benefits) is not based on hours worked. Furthermore, the C ity Manager position remains an “exempt” classification under the overtime provisions of the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) and Employee shall not be entitled to any compensation for overtime, nor subject to such overtime provisions of the FLSA.

1.4 Other Activities. Employee shall focus his professional time, ability, and attention to the City’s business during the term of this Agreement. Employee shall not engage, without the express prior written consent of the City Council, in any other business duties or pursuits whatsoever, or directly or indirectly render any services of a business, commercial, or professional nature, to any other person or organization, whether for compensation or otherwise, that is or may be competitive with the City, that might cause a conflict-of-interest with the City, or that otherwise might interfere with the business or operation of the City or the satisfactory performance of the functions and duties of the City Manager.

1.5 Employment Status. Employee shall serve at the will and pleasure of the City Council and understands he shall continue to be an “at -will” employee and shall be subject to summary dismissal without any right of notice or hearing, including any so-called due process pre- disciplinary “Skelly” hearing. The City may terminate Employee at any time in accordance with Section 3.2 below.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
438 of 932
3 1.6 Exemption from Personnel System. Redlands Municipal Code section 2.56.030 expressly exempts the “ City Manager” position from the City’s Personnel System established in Redlands Municipal Code Chapter 2.56. Employee understands, acknowledges and agrees that Employee is exempt from the City’s Personnel System.

1.7 City Documents. All data, studies, reports and other documents prepared by Employee while performing his duties during the term of this Agreement shall be furnished to and become the property of the City , without restriction or limitation on their use. All ideas, memoranda, specifications, plans, procedures, drawings, descriptions, computer program data, input record data, written information, and other materials either created by or provided to Employee in connection with the performance of this Agreement shall be held confidential by Employee to the extent permitted by applicable law, except as may be required by any governmental agency or court of competent jurisdiction. Such materials shall not be used by Employee, without the prior written consent of the City Council, for any purposes other than the performance of Employee’s duties. Additionally, no such materials may be disclosed to any person or entity not connected with the performance of services under this Agreement, except as required by (a) law, (b) any governmental agency, (c) subpoena, or (d) an order issued by a court of competent jurisdiction.

1.8 ICMA Code of Ethics. The Parties mutually desire for Employee to be subject to and comply with the International City /County Management Association (“ICMA”) Code of Ethics, and Employee commits to comply with the ICMA Code of Ethics. The City and the City Council agree that the City Council will not require that Employee violate the ICMA Code of Ethics as part of his employment with the City.

2. Compensation and Reimbursement

2.1 Current Base S alary. Beginning with the pay period to be paid on January 15, 2025, employee shall receive Three Hundred Twenty Thousand Dollars ($ 320,000) as his annual base salary (“Salary”) for the C ity M anager position.

Employee’s Salary shall be paid on a pro-rated basis bi-weekly at the same time as other employees of the C ity are paid, and shall be subject to normal and proper withholdings as determined by state and federal law, and as determined appropriate by the City Council, and shall be subject to payroll taxes, workers’ compensation, and other payroll- related liability costs.

Effective the first payroll period following July 1, 2025, Employee will receive a one percent (1%) increase to his Salary over the prior year.

2.2 Salary Adjustment. Following the annual performance evaluation set forth in Section 5.2 hereof, the City Council may increase Employee’s base salary and benefits package based on the results of those annual reviews. Any adjustments in the base salary and/or benefits following the annual performance evaluation under Section 5.2 are not automatic and instead shall be at the sole discretion of the City Council.

2.3 Incentive Bonus. Annually, beginning in August 2023, Employee may be eligible for a lump -sum incentive bonus, at the sole discretion of the City Council, for performance Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
439 of 932
4 substantially above expectations. The City Council may establish criteria as the basis for any bonus that may be awarded and such criteria will be delivered in writing to Employee before December 31 of each year. Employee and City agree that the City Council is not obligated to grant an incentive bonus and that no assurances have been given to Employee that any incentive bonus will be granted during the term of this Agreement.

2.4 Business Expense Reimbursements. The City shall reimburse Employee for reasonable and necessary travel, subsistence, and other City- related business expenses incurred by Employee in the performance of his duties. All reimbursements shall be subject to and in accordance with California law, the City’s adopted policies, and IRS rules for reporting compensation through payroll or reimbursement through accounts payable.

3. Termination

3.1 Termination by Employee. Employee may terminate this Agreement at any time, provided Employee provides the City with at least thirty (30) days prior written notice. In the event Employee terminates this Agreement, Employee expressly agrees that Employee shall not be entitled to any severance pay.

3.2 Termination by the City. The City may terminate this Agreement at any time, with the affirmative vote of the majority of the City Council at a duly authorized meeting, with or without cause, by providing written notice to Employee of the same. The City’s right to terminate Employee pursuant to this Section 3.2 shall not be subject to , or in any way limited by, the City’s Personnel Rules and Regulations, or any subsequent related resolutions, or past City practices related to the employment, discipline or termination of the City’s employees.

Employee expressly waives any rights provided for the C ity Manager under the City’s Personnel Rules and Regulations, Municipal Code, or under other local, state or federal law to any other form of pre- or post- termination hearing, appeal, or other administrative process pertaining to termination. Nothing herein shall be construed to create a property interest, where one does not exist by rule of law, in the position of City Manager.

(a) Termination by the City for Cause. The City may terminate this Agreement at any time by providing Employee with prior written notice of the termination for cause and the facts and grounds constituting such cause. The term “cause” shall be defined to include any misconduct materially related to performance of official duties, including, but not be limited to, any of the following: (1) willful or persistent material breach of duties or inattention to duties, (2) résumé fraud or other acts of material dishonesty, (3) unauthorized or excessive absence or leave, (4) conviction of a misdemeanor involving moral turpitude (i.e., offenses contrary to justice, honesty, or morality) or abuse of position as C ity Manager, (5) conviction of a felony under California law, (6) violation by Employee of the City’s anti -harassment policies, as may be amended, or a finding a legally prohibited personal act of harassment against a City official or employee or legally prohibited personal act of discrimination against a City official or employee has occurred and Employee was aware or should have been aware of that act, (7) violation of state law or the RMC or any City ordinance, rule or regulation, (8) use or possession of illegal drugs in violation of state law and/or City policy, (9) continued abuse of non-prescription drugs or alcohol Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
440 of 932
5 that materially affects the performance of required duties as C ity Manager, (10) engaging in conduct unbecoming for a public official or which brings disrepute to the City, (11) any illegal or unethical act involving personal gain, including conviction of theft or attempted theft, (12) Employee’s significant mismanagement of City finances, (13) any pattern of repeated, willful and intentional insubordination of the City Council, (14) gross misfeasance or gross malfeasance, (15) failure to comply with the ICMA Code of Ethics, as may be amended; or (16) any similar cause.

For any of the foregoing, the City may, in its discretion, place Employee on paid or unpaid administrative leave until resolution . If the City terminates , for cause, this Agreement and the services of Employee hereunder, then the City shall have no obligation to pay Employee any severance pursuant to section 4, below.

(b) Termination by the City without Cause. The City may terminate Employee without cause, with no less than a sixty (60) day notice of intention to terminate his employment, unless such notice period is waived in whole or in part by the City Council , based upon any management reason such as implementing the City’s goals or policies, including, but not limited to: (i) change of administration, or ( ii) incompatibility of management styles , or for any other reason, or no publicly stated reason. In the event Employee is terminated without cause, Employee shall be compensated at full pay and benefits until the effective date of termination. If so requested by the City Council, Employee shall continue to use his best efforts and skills to perform his duties during this period and shall fully cooperate with any successor designated by the City Council.

Employee will qualify for severance pay according to Section 4.1 below. Employee expressly agrees Employee shall not be entitled to any severance pay as the result of the termination of this Agreement except as provided in Section 4.1 below.

4. Severance

4.1 Severance Pay. In the event Employee is terminated without cause and Employee does not challenge such termination, including, but not limited to, by means of appeal or civil or administrative claim or “ liberty-interest” hearing, then the City shall pay to Employee severance in an amount equal to twelve months Employee’s base salary then in effect .

Notwithstanding any other provision of this Section 4.1, if such proposed severance payment exceeds the amount authorized to be paid under Government Code Section 53260, then the amount paid to Employee shall be reduced in the amount necessary to comply with such statute. (Government Code Section 53260 provides all contracts of employment with a city must include a provision limiting the maximum cash settlement for the termination of the contract to the monthly salary (excluding benefits) multiplied by the number of months left on the unexpired term, but not more than eighteen (18) months if the unexpired term exceeds eighteen ( 18) months). The severance payment shall not include the monetary value of benefits during said time, but salary only.

4.2 No Severance Pay if Termination for Cause or Initiated by Employee. As provided in Subdivision 3.2(a), if Employee is terminated for cause, then the City shall have no obligation to pay the severance provided for in Section 4.1 above. As provided in Section 3.1, if Employee initiates termination of this Agreement, then the City shall have no obligation to pay the severance provided for in Section 4.1 above.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
441 of 932
6 4.3 Sole Rights. The severance rights provided in this Section 4 shall constitute the sole and only entitlement of Employee with respect to severance pay in the event of the termination, other than for cause or by expiration of this Agreement. Employee expressly waives any and all other rights with respect to severance pay except as provided herein.

5. Performance Evaluations

5.1. Purpose. The performance review and evaluation process set forth herein is intended to provide review and feedback to Employee so as to facilitate the effective management of the City. Nothing herein shall be deemed to alter or change the employment status of Employee as City Manager (as set forth in Section 1.6 above), nor shall this Section 5 be construed as requiring “cause” to terminate this Agreement, or the services of Employee hereunder.

5.2. Annual Evaluation. The City Council shall endeavor to conduct a formal or informal review and evaluate the performance of Employee on an annual basis within thirty (30) days before the anniversary date of the Effective Date of this Agreement in each year during the term hereof. Such performance review and evaluation may be conducted concurrently with an annual base salary review provided for in Section 2.2 hereof, and in accordance with the purpose noted in Section 5.1 above.

5.3. Establishment of Goals . The City Council will establish performance objectives and goals for Employee in connection with the initial evaluation, and each annual evaluation, of Employee pursuant to this S ection 5. Such objectives and goals shall be reasonably attainable within the time frame established by the City Council and within the City’s annual budget.

6. Benefits and Other Compensation

6.1 Professional Development. The City recognizes its obligation to the professional development of the City Manager and agrees Employee shall be given adequate opportunities to develop and maintain skills and abilities as the City Manager. Employee is expected and encouraged to and does agree to participate in professional organizations and to attend local and regional meetings and conferences related to matters of interest to the City consistent with the time required for such attendance in relationship to Employee’s other responsibilities as determined by the City Council. The City Council hereby agrees to budget an amount , to be determined in the exercise of its sole discretion , to pay the cost, travel and subsistence expense of Employee for professional and/or official travel, meetings, and occasions adequate to continue professional development of Employee and to adequately pursue necessary official functions for the City.

Employee shall be responsible for maintaining any professional certifications recognized as necessary or desir able in the performance of the duties hereunder. The City agrees to pay the annual professional dues and subscriptions necessary for full participation in national, regional, state, or local associations and organizations necessary and desirable for the be st interests of the City, and for Employee’s continued professional participation and advancement. To authorize the City’s annual costs related to Employee’s continued professional development, the anticipated costs must be included in the City’s adopted or amended annual budget. The City Council is the approval authority for the City’s annual budget. At a minimum, that may include any professional dues for membership with the I CMA, and the League of California Cities (LCC), as well as Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
442 of 932
7 including travel expenses and registration for attendance at the annual ICMA conference, the annual LCC General Membership conference (LCC’s Annual Conference), the annual LCC City Manager Department conference, and the annual LCC New Mayor and Council Mem bers Academy.

6.2 Paid Annual Leave. Employee shall be entitled to paid annual leave (“Annual Leave”) at an accrual rate of sixteen and fifty-four one-hundredths (16.54) hours pro rata per pay period. Employee’s Annual Leave is inclusive of all other leave benefits including, but not limited to, sick leave, executive leave, and vacation. Upon separation, for any reason, Employee shall be entitled to one hundred percent (100%) of Employee’s unused Annual Leave balance then existing, at Employee’s then current hourly rate of pay, subject to normal and proper withholdings as determined by state and federal law, and shall be subject to payroll taxes, workers’ compensation, and other payroll-related liability costs in the same manner as other employees of the City. (a) Holiday Leave. Employee shall be granted the following fourteen (14 ) holidays: New Year’s Day, Martin Luther King Day, President's Day, Cesar Chavez Day, Memorial Day, Juneteenth, Independence Day, Labor Day, Columbus Day, Veteran's Day, Thanksgiving Day, Day after Thanksgiving Day, Christmas Eve and Christmas Day. Employee may bank unused holidays for up to four months.

6.3 Health and Welfare Benefits. Employee shall be entitled to certain rights and privileges no less than all other benefits that are generally accorded to City Department Directors regarding health, welfare and benefits, as provided in the City Department Directors’ Memorandum of Understanding, and no less than as set forth in Exhibit “A” to this Agreement.

6.4 Retirement. Employee is believed to be a New Member/PEPRA, as defined by CalPERS and as mandated by the Public Employees’ Pension Reform Act of 2013. Employee will be classified in the City’s Tier II pension plan. Accordingly, E mployee shall be entitled to participate in the City’s CalPERS Retirement Program with the 2% at 62 formula.

6.5 Automobile. Employee shall receive Five Hundred Dollars ($500.00) per month as vehicle allowance to reimburse Employee for use of a personal vehicle in pursuit of recognized official duties. The allowance will be paid in the regular payroll process with Salary beginning with the first payroll paid subsequent to the Employee’s commencement date consistent with the payment method of allowances provided to other employees of the City. The allowance is subject to normal and proper withholdings as determined by state and federal law and shall be subject to payroll taxes and other payroll-related liability costs in the same manner as other employees of the City. Employee shall be responsible for any personal income tax that may result from that reimbursement.

6.6 Deferred Compensation. Employee is eligible to participate in the City’s 457(b) and 401(a) deferred compensation programs. Commencing January 2023, on or before the second payroll check date of each calendar year the City will contribute the maximum amount allowed under the law (including catchup provisions for employees 50 years or older) for that year to Employee’s 457(b) deferred compensation plan. Additionally, commencing January 2023, on or Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
443 of 932
8 before the second payroll check date of each calendar year the City will also contribute the maximum amount allowed under the Public Employees’ Pension Reform Act for that year to Employee’s 401(a) deferred compensation plan in an amount equal to the result of the following formula: the difference between the Base Salary and the applicable pensionable compensation limit, pursuant to Government Code section 7522.10, but in no event higher than the Code 401(a)(17) limit, multiplied by the applicable employer normal cost rate for the City’s miscellaneous plan as determined by CalPERS and set forth in the annual actuarial valuation reports issued by CalPERS. This amount shall not be reported to CalPERS as pensionable compensation and shall not be subject to any withholdings or taxes in accordance with Sections 3121(a)(5)(A) and 3401(a)(12)(A) of the Internal Revenue Code. If at any time the City ceases to participate in either a 457(b) or 401(a) plan, or is otherwise unable to make the contribution, Employee’s salary will be adjusted to include the balance of the unmade contribution.

6.7 Bonding. The City shall bear the full cost of any fidelity or other bonds required for Employee under any law or City ordinance.

6.8 Flexible Spending Account. The City provides a Flexible Spending Account (FSA) program at Employee’s sole cost and expense (employee cost may be income tax deferred in accordance with IRS regulations). Expenses that may be reimbursed using the FSA program include childcare, medical expenses not covered by insurance plan, orthodontic work, and similar qualifying expenses.

6.9 Business Equipment. The City will provide to Employee any job- related personal tools or equipment, such as a computer, desk, land-line phone, file cabinets, table and chairs, that serve the professional development of Employee and/or is needed to perform Employee’s functions and duties. Upon termination, for any reason, Employee shall return all business equipment to the City no later than Employee’s last day of employment. The City shall provide a City-owned cell phone for City-related business and functions during, before and after normal work hours. The City shall pay for any expenses related to initial purchase, data plan, monthly service plan, insurance, and replacement due to normal wear and tear.

Employee shall follow the inventory control procedures for portable devices such as laptops and cell phones consistent with control procedures for other City employees. Employee may opt to receive a cellular telephone/smartphone stipend of $ 100 per month in lieu of device and service plan provided by City.

6.10 Additional compensation. The City Council may authorize and grant to Employee additional compensation and/or benefits in the future as may be deemed appropriate. Such additional compensation or benefits shall be made a part of this Agreement by written Amendment pursuant to Section 9.2 to be applied prospectively, unless City Council acts to provide otherwise.

7. Indemnification. To the extent mandated by the California Government Code, the City shall defend, hold harmless, and indemnify Employee against any tort, professional liability, claim or demand, or other legal action arising out of an alleged act or omission occurring in t he performance of Employee’s services under this Agreement. This section shall not apply to any intentional tort or crime committed by Employee, to any action outside the course and scope of Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
444 of 932
9 Employee’s employment, or any other intentional or malicious conduct or gross negligence of Employee.

8. Other Terms - Conditions of Employment . The City Council, in consultation with Employee, shall establish any such other terms and conditions of employment as it may determine from time to time, provided such terms and conditions do not exceed the maximum salary and benefits approved by the City Council and are reduced to writing and signed by Employee and the Mayor of the City.

9. General Provisions

9.1 Entire Agreement. This Agreement represents the entire Agreement and understanding between the Parties and as of the Effective Date of this Agreement amends and supersedes any and all other agreements and understandings, either oral or in writing, between the Parties with respect to Employee’s employment by the City and contains all of the covenants and agreements between the Parties with respect to such employment. No ordinances or resolutions of the City governing employment, including the Personnel System, shall apply unless specified herein. Each Party to this Agreement acknowledges that no representations, inducements, promises or agreements, orally or otherwise, have been made by either Party, or anyone acting on behalf of either Party, which are n ot embodied herein, and that no other agreement, statement or promises not contained in this Agreement shall be valid or binding upon either Party.

9.2 Amendment. This Agreement may be amended at any time by the mutual consent of the Parties by an instrument in writing, which amendment shall require City Council approval.

9.3 Notice. Any notice 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, 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 addr ess set forth below, or such other address as a Party may provide notice in accordance with this section:

CITY: EMPLOYEE:

City Clerk Charles M. Duggan Jr.

City of Redlands Address on file with City
35 Cajon Street, Suite 200
PO Box 3005 (mailing)
Redlands, CA 92373

9.4 Conflicts Prohibited. During the term of this Agreement, Employee shall not engage in any business or transaction or maintain a financial interest which conflicts, or reasonably might be expected to conflict, with the proper discharge of E mployee’s duties under this Agreement. Employee shall comply with all requirements of law, including but not limited to, Sections 87100 et seq., Section 1090 and Section 1126 of the Government Code, and all other Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
445 of 932
10 similar statutory and administrative rules.

9.5 Effect of Waiver. The failure of either Party to insist on strict compliance with any of the terms, covenants, or conditions of this Agreement by the other Party shall not be deemed a waiver of that term, covenant, or condition, nor shall any waiver or relinquishment of any right or power at any one time or times be deemed a waiver or relinquishment of that right or power for all or any other times.

9.6 Partial Invalidity. If any provision in this Agreement is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, void or unenforceable, the remaining provisions shall nevertheless continue in full force without being impaired or invalidated in any way.

9.7 Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California, which are in full force and effect as of the Effective D ate of this Agreement.

9.8 Government Code Sections 53243 - 53243.4. Government Code sections 53243 - 53243.4 sought to provide greater transparency in local government and institute certain limitations on compensation paid to local government executives. Those statutes require that contracts between local agencies and certain employees include provisions requiring an employee who is convicted of a crime involving an abuse of his office or position to provide reimbursement to the local agency. Those statutes are incorporated herein by reference.

Accordingly, the Parties agree that it is their mutual intent to fully comply with these Government Code sections and all other applicable law as it exists as of the date of execution of this Agreement and as such laws may be amended from time to time thereafter. Specifically, th e following Government Code sections are called out and hereby incorporated by this Agreement:

Section 53243. Reimbursement of paid leave salary required upon conviction of crime involving office or position.

Section 53243.1. Reimbursement of legal criminal defense upon conviction of crime involving office or position.

Section 53243.2. Reimbursement of cash settlement upon conviction of crime involving office or position.

Section 53243.3. Reimbursement of non-contractual payments upon conviction or crime involving office or position.

Section 53243.4. “Abuse of office or position” defined.

Employee represents Employee has reviewed, is familiar with, and agrees to comply fully with each of these provisions if any of these provisions are applicable to Employee, including that Employee agrees any cash settlement or severance related to a termination Employee may receive from the City shall be fully reimbursed to the City if Employee is convicted of a crime involving an abuse of Employee’s office or position.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
446 of 932
11 9.9 Independent Legal A dvice. The City and Employee represent and warrant to each other that each has received legal advice from independent and separate legal counsel with respect to the legal effect of this Agreement, or had the opportunity to do so, and the City and Employee further represent and warrant that each has carefully reviewed this entire Agreement and that each and every term thereof is understood and that the terms of this Agreement are contractual and not a mere recital. This Agreement shall not be construed against the Party or its representatives who drafted it or who drafted any portion thereof.

9.10 Prohibition against Assignment. Neither this Agreement nor any right, privilege or obligation of Employee hereunder shall be assigned or transferred by him without the prior written consent of the City Council. Any attempt at assignment or transfer in violation of this subsection shall, in the sole discretion of and at the option of the City Council, be null and void and may be considered a material breach of this Agreement and “cause” for termination of this Agreement.

9.11 Severability . If any provision of this Agreement is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, void or unenforceable, the remaining provisions shall nevertheless continue in full force and effect without being impaired or invalidated in any way.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City of Redlands has caused this Agreement to be signed and executed on its behalf by its Mayor, and duly attested by the City Clerk, and Employee has signed and executed this Agreement, all in triplicate.

CITY OF REDLANDS EMPLOYEE

By: ___________________________ By: ___________________________ Eddie Tejeda, Mayor Charles M. Duggan, Jr.

ATTEST:

By: ___________________________
Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
447 of 932
12 Exhibit “A”
Additional Benefits

• Medical Insurance – City pays the entire monthly premium for employees and their eligible dependents through PERS Health

• Dental Insurance – City pays the entire monthly premium for employees and their eligible dependents

• Vision Insurance - City pays the entire monthly premium for employees and their eligible dependents

• $150 per year to offset medical insurance co-payments and/or deductibles

• Life Insurance - $25,000

• Accidental Death & Dismemberment Insurance - $25,000

• State Disability Insurance – Premium paid by Employee

• Credit Union

• Employee Assistance Program

• YMCA Membership – City will provide a paid annual membership for Employee to the Redlands YMCA.

• Retiree Health – upon retirement from the City and CalPERS, Employee will be eligible for medical coverage as provided through CalPERS. The City will contribute $397 per month towards the medical premium.

• Tuition Reimbursement - $2500 per year reimbursement for courses successfully taken at an accredited institution.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
448 of 932

1 CITY OF REDLANDS

AMENDED AND RESTATED CITY MANAGER EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT

This Amended and Restated City Manager Employment Agreement (this “Agreement”) is made and entered into the 5th1st day of October July , 202 43 (“Effective Date”) by and between the City of Redlands, a general law city and municipal corporation (“City”) and Charles M.

Duggan Jr., an individual (“Employee”). For purposes of this Agreement, City and Employee are sometimes individually referred to herein as a “Party” and, together, as the “Parties.”

RECITALS

WHEREAS, Employee has dutifully served as City Manager since January 2020; and

WHEREAS, it is the desire of City to continue to retain the services of Employee as City Manager and the desire of the Employee to serve in that capacity; and

WHEREAS, Government Code section 34852 provides that an ordinance establishing a city manager form of government shall define the powers and duties of the city manager; and

WHEREAS, the duties of the city manager of the City are set forth in full in Chapter 2.04 of the Redlands Municipal Code (”RMC”); and

WHEREAS, RMC section 2.04.010 states: “The City Manager shall be appointed by the City Council solely on the basis of his executive and administrative qualifications and ability, and shall hold office at and during the pleasure of the City Council;” and

WHEREAS, it is the desire of City to: (1) provide inducement for Employee to remain in City’s employment; (2) make possible full work productivity by providing Employee with assurances regarding his employment; and (3) provide an equitable process for terminating Employee’s services if that should occur; and

WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Redlands (“City Council”) has determined that Employee has the required executive and administrative qualifications and ability, along with the level of education, experience, skills and expertise to serve as the City Manager of the City; and

WHEREAS, it is the desire of the City Council to amend and restate the terms and conditions of the Agreement.

NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the mutual promises contained herein, the Parties agree as follows:

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
449 of 932

2 AGREEMENT

1. Employment and Duties

1.1 Duties. The City Council hereby appoints Employee as the City Manager for the City to perform the functions and duties of that position, as described in the California Government Code and Chapter 2.04 of the Redlands Municipal Code (as such Chapter may be amended from time to time in the sole discretion of the City Council without any amendment of this Agreement or Employee’s acquiescence), and such other legally permissible and proper duties and functions as the City Council shall, from time to time, direct or assign to Employee. Employee agrees to perform all such functions and duties to the best of his ability and in an efficient, competent, and ethical manner.

1.2 Term. The City hereby employs Employee as City Manager on an at-will basis remaining in effect until January 31, 20286.

1.3 Work Schedule. Employee will report to the entire City Council. It is recognized that Employee is expected to engage in the hours of work that are necessary to fulfill the obligations of the position of City Manager, must be available at all times and devote significant time outside of “normal” City office hours to the business of the City. Employee acknowledges that proper performance of the duties of the City Manager will require Employee to generally observe normal business hours (currently 7:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m., Monday through Friday in accordance with City’s “9/80” work schedule), as set by the City and as may be duly revised from time-to-time by the City, and will also often require the performance of necessary services outside of normal business hours. Employee may bank Fridays worked while City Hall is closed for up to four months. Employee is pre-authorized to work remotely, for periods of time not exceeding two- weeks, four times each year. Employee’s compensation (whether salary or benefits) is not based on hours worked. Furthermore, the City Manager position remains an “exempt” classification under the overtime provisions of the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) and Employee shall not be entitled to any compensation for overtime, nor subject to such overtime provisions of the FLSA.

1.4 Other Activities. Employee shall focus his professional time, ability, and attention to the City’s business during the term of this Agreement. Employee shall not engage, without the express prior written consent of the City Council, in any other business duties or pursuits whatsoever, or directly or indirectly render any services of a business, commercial, or professional nature, to any other person or organization, whether for compensation or otherwise, that is or may be competitive with the City, that might cause a conflict-of-interest with the City, or that otherwise might interfere with the business or operation of the City or the satisfactory performance of the functions and duties of the City Manager.

1.5 Employment Status. Employee shall serve at the will and pleasure of the City Council and understands he shall continue to be an “at-will” employee and shall be subject to summary dismissal without any right of notice or hearing, including any so-called due process pre- disciplinary “Skelly” hearing. The City may terminate Employee at any time in accordance with Section 3.2 below.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
450 of 932

3 1.6 Exemption from Personnel System. Redlands Municipal Code section 2.56.030 expressly exempts the “City Manager” position from the City’s Personnel System established in Redlands Municipal Code Chapter 2.56. Employee understands, acknowledges and agrees that Employee is exempt from the City’s Personnel System.

1.7 City Documents. All data, studies, reports and other documents prepared by Employee while performing his duties during the term of this Agreement shall be furnished to and become the property of the City, without restriction or limitation on their use. All ideas, memoranda, specifications, plans, procedures, drawings, descriptions, computer program data, input record data, written information, and other materials either created by or provided to Employee in connection with the performance of this Agreement shall be held confidential by Employee to the extent permitted by applicable law, except as may be required by any governmental agency or court of competent jurisdiction. Such materials shall not be used by Employee, without the prior written consent of the City Council, for any purposes other than the performance of Employee’s duties. Additionally, no such materials may be disclosed to any person or entity not connected with the performance of services under this Agreement, except as required by (a) law, (b) any governmental agency, (c) subpoena, or (d) an order issued by a court of competent jurisdiction.

1.8 ICMA Code of Ethics. The Parties mutually desire for Employee to be subject to and comply with the International City/County Management Association (“ICMA”) Code of Ethics, and Employee commits to comply with the ICMA Code of Ethics. The City and the City Council agree that the City Council will not require that Employee violate the ICMA Code of Ethics as part of his employment with the City.

2. Compensation and Reimbursement

2.1 Current Base Salary. Beginning with the pay period to be paid on January 15, 2025, Eemployee shall receive Two Hundred Eighty Thousand Dollars ($280,000) Three Hundred Twenty Thousand Dollars ($320,000) as his annual base salary (“Salary”) for the City Manager position. Employee’s Salary shall be paid on a pro-rated basis bi-weekly at the same time as other employees of the City are paid, and shall be subject to normal and proper withholdings as determined by state and federal law, and as determined appropriate by the City Council, and shall be subject to payroll taxes, workers’ compensation, and other payroll-related liability costs. Effective the first payroll period following July 1, 2025, Employee will receive a one percent (1%) increase to his Salary over the prior year.

a. Effective the first payroll period following July 1, 2023, Employee will receive a seven percent (7%) increase to his Salary.
b. Effective the first payroll period following July 1, 2024, Employee will receive a two percent (2%) increase to his Salary over the prior year. c. Effective the first payroll period following July 1, 2023, Employee will receive a two percent (2%) increase to his Salary over the prior year.

2.2 Salary Adjustment. Following the annual performance evaluation set forth in Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
451 of 932

4 Section 5.2 hereof, the City Council may increase Employee’s base salary and benefits package based on the results of those annual reviews. Any adjustments in the base salary and/or benefits following the annual performance evaluation under Section 5.2 are not automatic and instead shall be at the sole discretion of the City Council.

2.3 Incentive Bonus. Annually, beginning in August 2023, Employee may be eligible for a lump-sum incentive bonus, at the sole discretion of the City Council, for performance substantially above expectations. The City Council willmay establish criteria as the basis for any bonus that may be awarded and such criteria will be delivered in writing to Employee before December 31 of each year. Employee and City agree that the City Council is not obligated to grant an incentive bonus and that no assurances have been given to Employee that any incentive bonus will be granted during the term of this Agreement.

2.4 Business Expense Reimbursements. The City shall reimburse Employee for reasonable and necessary travel, subsistence, and other City- r e l a t e d business expenses incurred by Employee in the performance of his duties. All reimbursements shall be subject to and in accordance with California law, the City’s adopted policies, and IRS rules for reporting compensation through payroll or reimbursement through accounts payable.

3. Termination

3.1 Termination by Employee. Employee may terminate this Agreement at any time, provided Employee provides the City with at least thirty (30) days prior written notice. In the event Employee terminates this Agreement, Employee expressly agrees that Employee shall not be entitled to any severance pay.

3.2 Termination by the City. The City may terminate this Agreement at any time, with the affirmative vote of the majority of the City Council at a duly authorized meeting, with or without cause, by providing written notice to Employee of the same. The City’s right to terminate Employee pursuant to this Section 3.2 shall not be subject to, or in any way limited by, the City’s Personnel Rules and Regulations, or any subsequent related resolutions, or past City practices related to the employment, discipline or termination of the City’s employees.

Employee expressly waives any rights provided for the City Manager under the City’s Personnel Rules and Regulations, Municipal Code, or under other local, state or federal law to any other form of pre- or post-termination hearing, appeal, or other administrative process pertaining to termination. Nothing herein shall be construed to create a property interest, where one does not exist by rule of law, in the position of City Manager.

(a) Termination by the City for Cause. The City may terminate this Agreement at any time by providing Employee with prior written notice of the termination for cause and the facts and grounds constituting such cause. The term “cause” shall be defined to include any misconduct materially related to performance of official duties, including, but not be limited to, any of the following: (1) willful or persistent material breach of duties or inattention to duties, (2) résumé fraud or other acts of material dishonesty, (3) unauthorized or excessive absence or leave, (4) conviction of a misdemeanor involving moral turpitude (i.e., offenses contrary to justice, Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
452 of 932

5 honesty, or morality) or abuse of position as City Manager, (5) conviction of a felony under California law, (6) violation by Employee of the City’s anti-harassment policies, as may be amended, or a finding a legally prohibited personal act of harassment against a City official or employee or legally prohibited personal act of discrimination against a City official or employee has occurred and Employee was aware or should have been aware of that act, (7) violation of state law or the RMC or any City ordinance, rule or regulation, (8) use or possession of illegal drugs in violation of state law and/or City policy, (9) continued abuse of non-prescription drugs or alcohol that materially affects the performance of required duties as City Manager, (10) engaging in conduct unbecoming for a public official or which brings disrepute to the City, (11) any illegal or unethical act involving personal gain, including conviction of theft or attempted theft, (12) Employee’s significant mismanagement of City finances, (13) any pattern of repeated, willful and intentional insubordination of the City Council, (14) gross misfeasance or gross malfeasance, (15) failure to comply with the ICMA Code of Ethics, as may be amended; or (16) any similar cause.

For any of the foregoing, the City may, in its discretion, place Employee on paid or unpaid administrative leave until resolution. If the City terminates, for cause, this Agreement and the services of Employee hereunder, then the City shall have no obligation to pay Employee any severance pursuant to section 4, below.

(b) Termination by the City without Cause. The City may terminate Employee without cause, with no less than a sixty (60) day notice of intention to terminate his employment, unless such notice period is waived in whole or in part by the City Council, based upon any management reason such as implementing the City’s goals or policies, including, but not limited to: (i) change of administration, or (ii) incompatibility of management styles, or for any other reason, or no publicly stated reason. In the event Employee is terminated without cause, Employee shall be compensated at full pay and benefits until the effective date of termination. If so requested by the City Council, Employee shall continue to use his best efforts and skills to perform his duties during this period and shall fully cooperate with any successor designated by the City Council.

Employee will qualify for severance pay according to Section 4.1 below. Employee expressly agrees Employee shall not be entitled to any severance pay as the result of the termination of this Agreement except as provided in Section 4.1 below.

4. Severance

4.1 Severance Pay. In the event Employee is terminated without cause and Employee does not challenge such termination, including, but not limited to, by means of appeal or civil or administrative claim or “liberty-interest” hearing, then the City shall pay to Employee severance in an amount equal to twelve months Employee’s base salary then in effect.

Notwithstanding any other provision of this Section 4.1, if such proposed severance payment exceeds the amount authorized to be paid under Government Code Section 53260, then the amount paid to Employee shall be reduced in the amount necessary to comply with such statute. (Government Code Section 53260 provides all contracts of employment with a city must include a provision limiting the maximum cash settlement for the termination of the contract to the monthly salary (excluding benefits) multiplied by the number of months left on the unexpired term, but not more than eighteen (18) months if the unexpired term exceeds eighteen (18) months). The severance payment shall not include the monetary value of benefits during said time, but salary only.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
453 of 932

6 4.2 No Severance Pay if Termination for Cause or Initiated by Employee. As provided in Subdivision 3.2(a), if Employee is terminated for cause, then the City shall have no obligation to pay the severance provided for in Section 4.1 above. As provided in Section 3.1, if Employee initiates termination of this Agreement, then the City shall have no obligation to pay the severance provided for in Section 4.1 above.

4.3 Sole Rights. The severance rights provided in this Section 4 shall constitute the sole and only entitlement of Employee with respect to severance pay in the event of the termination, other than for cause or by expiration of this Agreement. Employee expressly waives any and all other rights with respect to severance pay except as provided herein.

5. Performance Evaluations

5.1. Purpose. The performance review and evaluation process set forth herein is intended to provide review and feedback to Employee so as to facilitate the effective management of the City. Nothing herein shall be deemed to alter or change the employment status of Employee as City Manager (as set forth in Section 1.6 above), nor shall this Section 5 be construed as requiring “cause” to terminate this Agreement, or the services of Employee hereunder.

5.2. Annual Evaluation. The City Council shall endeavor to conduct a formal or informal review and evaluate the performance of Employee on an annual basis within thirty (30) days before the anniversary date of the Effective Date of this Agreement in each year during the term hereof. Such performance review and evaluation may be conducted concurrently with an annual base salary review provided for in Section 2.2 hereof, and in accordance with the purpose noted in Section 5.1 above.

5.3. Establishment of Goals. The City Council will establish performance objectives and goals for Employee in connection with the initial evaluation, and each annual evaluation, of Employee pursuant to this Section 5. Such objectives and goals shall be reasonably attainable within the time frame established by the City Council and within the City’s annual budget.

6. Benefits and Other Compensation

6.1 Professional Development. The City recognizes its obligation to the professional development of the City Manager and agrees Employee shall be given adequate opportunities to develop and maintain skills and abilities as the City Manager. Employee is expected and encouraged to and does agree to participate in professional organizations and to attend local and regional meetings and conferences related to matters of interest to the City consistent with the time required for such attendance in relationship to Employee’s other responsibilities as determined by the City Council. The City Council hereby agrees to budget an amount, to be determined in the exercise of its sole discretion, to pay the cost, travel and subsistence expense of Employee for professional and/or official travel, meetings, and occasions adequate to continue professional development of Employee and to adequately pursue necessary official functions for the City.

Employee shall be responsible for maintaining any professional certifications recognized as necessary or desirable in the performance of the duties hereunder. The City agrees to pay the Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
454 of 932

7 annual professional dues and subscriptions necessary for full participation in national, regional, state, or local associations and organizations necessary and desirable for the best interests of the City, and for Employee’s continued professional participation and advancement. To authorize the City’s annual costs related to Employee’s continued professional development, the anticipated costs must be included in the City’s adopted or amended annual budget. The City Council is the approval authority for the City’s annual budget. At a minimum, that may include any professional dues for membership with the ICMA, and the League of California Cities (LCC), as well as including travel expenses and registration for attendance at the annual ICMA conference, the annual LCC General Membership conference (LCC’s Annual Conference), the annual LCC City Manager Department conference, and the annual LCC New Mayor and Council Members Academy.

6.2 Paid Annual Leave. Employee shall be entitled to paid annual leave (“Annual Leave”) at an accrual rate of sixteen and fifty-four one-hundredths (16.54) hours pro rata per pay period. Employee’s Annual Leave is inclusive of all other leave benefits including, but not limited to, sick leave, executive leave, and vacation. Upon separation, for any reason, Employee shall be entitled to one hundred percent (100%) of Employee’s unused Annual Leave balance then existing, at Employee’s then current hourly rate of pay, subject to normal and proper withholdings as determined by state and federal law, and shall be subject to payroll taxes, workers’ compensation, and other payroll-related liability costs in the same manner as other employees of the City. (a) Holiday Leave. Employee shall be granted the following fourteen (14) holidays: New Year’s Day, Martin Luther King Day, President's Day, Cesar Chavez Day, Memorial Day, Juneteenth, Independence Day, Labor Day, Columbus Day, Veteran's Day, Thanksgiving Day, Day after Thanksgiving Day, Christmas Eve and Christmas Day. Employee may bank unused holidays for up to four months.

6.3 Health and Welfare Benefits. Employee shall be entitled to certain rights and privileges no less than all other benefits that are generally accorded to City Department Directors regarding health, welfare and benefits, as provided in the City Department Directors’ Memorandum of Understanding, and no less than as set forth in Exhibit “A” to this Agreement.

6.4 Retirement. Employee is believed to be a New Member/PEPRA, as defined by CalPERS and as mandated by the Public Employees’ Pension Reform Act of 2013. Employee will be classified in the City’s Tier II pension plan. Accordingly, Employee shall be entitled to participate in the City’s CalPERS Retirement Program with the 2% at 62 formula.

6.5 Automobile. Employee shall receive Five Hundred Dollars ($500.00) per month as vehicle allowance to reimburse Employee for use of a personal vehicle in pursuit of recognized official duties. The allowance will be paid in the regular payroll process with Salary beginning with the first payroll paid subsequent to the Employee’s commencement date consistent with the payment method of allowances provided to other employees of the City. The allowance is subject to normal and proper withholdings as determined by state and federal law and shall be subject to payroll taxes and other payroll-related liability costs in the same manner as other employees of the City. Employee shall be responsible for any personal income tax Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
455 of 932

8 that may result from that reimbursement.

6.6 Deferred Compensation. Employee is eligible to participate in the City’s 457(b) and 401(a) deferred compensation programs. Commencing January 2023, on or before the second payroll check date of each calendar year the City will contribute the maximum amount allowed under the law (including catchup provisions for employees 50 years or older) for that year to Employee’s 457(b) deferred compensation plan. Additionally, commencing January 2023, on or before the second payroll check date of each calendar year the City will also contribute the maximum amount allowed under the Public Employees’ Pension Reform Act for that year to Employee’s 401(a) deferred compensation plan in an amount equal to the result of the following formula: the difference between the Base Salary and the applicable pensionable compensation limit, pursuant to Government Code section 7522.10, but in no event higher than the Code 401(a)(17) limit, multiplied by the applicable employer normal cost rate for the City’s miscellaneous plan as determined by CalPERS and set forth in the annual actuarial valuation reports issued by CalPERS. This amount shall not be reported to CalPERS as pensionable compensation and shall not be subject to any withholdings or taxes in accordance with Sections 3121(a)(5)(A) and 3401(a)(12)(A) of the Internal Revenue Code. If at any time the City ceases to participate in either a 457(b) or 401(a) plan, or is otherwise unable to make the contribution, Employee’s salary will be adjusted to include the balance of the unmade contribution.

6.7 Bonding. The City shall bear the full cost of any fidelity or other bonds required for Employee under any law or City ordinance.

6.8 Flexible Spending Account. The City provides a Flexible Spending Account (FSA) program at Employee’s sole cost and expense (employee cost may be income tax deferred in accordance with IRS regulations). Expenses that may be reimbursed using the FSA program include childcare, medical expenses not covered by insurance plan, orthodontic work, and similar qualifying expenses.

6.9 Business Equipment. The City will provide to Employee any job-related personal tools or equipment, such as a computer, desk, land-line phone, file cabinets, table and chairs, that serve the professional development of Employee and/or is needed to perform Employee’s functions and duties. Upon termination, for any reason, Employee shall return all business equipment to t h e City no later than Employee’s last day of employment. The City shall provide a City-owned cell phone for City-related business and functions during, before and after normal work hours. The City shall pay for any expenses related to initial purchase, data plan, monthly service plan, insurance, and replacement due to normal wear and tear.

Employee shall follow the inventory control procedures for portable devices such as laptops and cell phones consistent with control procedures for other City employees. Employee may opt to receive a cellular telephone/smartphone stipend of $100 per month in lieu of device and service plan provided by City.

6.10 Additional compensation. The City Council may authorize and grant to Employee additional compensation and/or benefits in the future as may be deemed appropriate. Such additional compensation or benefits shall be made a part of this Agreement by written Amendment pursuant to Section 9.2 to be applied prospectively, unless City Council acts to Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
456 of 932

9 provide otherwise.

7. Indemnification. To the extent mandated by the California Government Code, the City shall defend, hold harmless, and indemnify Employee against any tort, professional liability, claim or demand, or other legal action arising out of an alleged act or omission occurring in the performance of Employee’s services under this Agreement. This section shall not apply to any intentional tort or crime committed by Employee, to any action outside the course and scope of Employee’s employment, or any other intentional or malicious conduct or gross negligence of Employee.

8. Other Terms - Conditions of Employment. The City Council, in consultation with Employee, shall establish any such other terms and conditions of employment as it may determine from time to time, provided such terms and conditions do not exceed the maximum salary and benefits approved by the City Council and are reduced to writing and signed by Employee and the Mayor of the City.

9. General Provisions

9.1 Entire Agreement. This Agreement represents the entire Agreement and understanding between the Parties and as of the Effective Date of this Agreement amends and supersedes any and all other agreements and understandings, either oral or in writing, between the Parties with respect to Employee’s employment by the City and contains all of the covenants and agreements between the Parties with respect to such employment. No ordinances or resolutions of the City governing employment, including the Personnel System, shall apply unless specified herein. Each Party to this Agreement acknowledges that no representations, inducements, promises or agreements, orally or otherwise, have been made by either Party, or anyone acting on behalf of either Party, which are not embodied herein, and that no other agreement, statement or promises not contained in this Agreement shall be valid or binding upon either Party.

9.2 Amendment. This Agreement may be amended at any time by the mutual consent of the Parties by an instrument in writing, which amendment shall require City Council approval.

9.3 Notice. Any notice 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, 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: EMPLOYEE:

City Clerk Charles M. Duggan Jr.

City of Redlands Address on file with City
35 Cajon Street, Suite 200
PO Box 3005 (mailing)
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
457 of 932

10 Redlands, CA 92373

9.4 Conflicts Prohibited. During the term of this Agreement, Employee shall not engage in any business or transaction or maintain a financial interest which conflicts, or reasonably might be expected to conflict, with the proper discharge of Employee’s duties under this Agreement. Employee shall comply with all requirements of law, including but not limited to, Sections 87100 et seq., Section 1090 and Section 1126 of the Government Code, and all other similar statutory and administrative rules.

9.5 Effect of Waiver. The failure of either Party to insist on strict compliance with any of the terms, covenants, or conditions of this Agreement by the other Party shall not be deemed a waiver of that term, covenant, or condition, nor shall any waiver or relinquishment of any right or power at any one time or times be deemed a waiver or relinquishment of that right or power for all or any other times.

9.6 Partial Invalidity. If any provision in this Agreement is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, void or unenforceable, the remaining provisions shall nevertheless continue in full force without being impaired or invalidated in any way.

9.7 Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California, which are in full force and effect as of the Effective Date of this Agreement.

9.8 Government Code Sections 53243 - 53243.4. Government Code sections 53243 - 53243.4 sought to provide greater transparency in local government and institute certain limitations on compensation paid to local government executives. Those statutes require that contracts between local agencies and certain employees include provisions requiring an employee who is convicted of a crime involving an abuse of his office or position to provide reimbursement to the local agency. Those statutes are incorporated herein by reference.

Accordingly, the Parties agree that it is their mutual intent to fully comply with these Government Code sections and all other applicable law as it exists as of the date of execution of this Agreement and as such laws may be amended from time to time thereafter. Specifically, the following Government Code sections are called out and hereby incorporated by this Agreement:

Section 53243. Reimbursement of paid leave salary required upon conviction of crime involving office or position.

Section 53243.1. Reimbursement of legal criminal defense upon conviction of crime involving office or position.

Section 53243.2. Reimbursement of cash settlement upon conviction of crime involving office or position.

Section 53243.3. Reimbursement of non-contractual payments upon conviction or crime involving office or position.

Section 53243.4. “Abuse of office or position” defined.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
458 of 932

11 Employee represents Employee has reviewed, is familiar with, and agrees to comply fully with each of these provisions if any of these provisions are applicable to Employee, including that Employee agrees any cash settlement or severance related to a termination Employee may receive from the City shall be fully reimbursed to the City if Employee is convicted of a crime involving an abuse of Employee’s office or position.

9.9 Independent Legal Advice. The City and Employee represent and warrant to each other that each has received legal advice from independent and separate legal counsel with respect to the legal effect of this Agreement, or had the opportunity to do so, and the City and Employee further represent and warrant that each has carefully reviewed this entire Agreement and that each and every term thereof is understood and that the terms of this Agreement are contractual and not a mere recital. This Agreement shall not be construed against the Party or its representatives who drafted it or who drafted any portion thereof.

9.10 Prohibition against Assignment. Neither this Agreement nor any right, privilege or obligation of Employee hereunder shall be assigned or transferred by him without the prior written consent of the City Council. Any attempt at assignment or transfer in violation of this subsection shall, in the sole discretion of and at the option of the City Council, be null and void and may be considered a material breach of this Agreement and “cause” for termination of this Agreement.

9.11 Severability. If any provision of this Agreement is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, void or unenforceable, the remaining provisions shall nevertheless continue in full force and effect without being impaired or invalidated in any way.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City of Redlands has caused this Agreement to be signed and executed on its behalf by its Mayor, and duly attested by the City Clerk, and Employee has signed and executed this Agreement, all in triplicate.

CITY OF REDLANDS EMPLOYEE

By: ___________________________ By: ___________________________ Eddie Tejeda, Mayor Charles M. Duggan, Jr.

ATTEST:

By: ___________________________
Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
459 of 932

12 Exhibit “A”
Additional Benefits

• Medical Insurance – City pays the entire monthly premium for employees and their eligible dependents through PERS Health

• Dental Insurance – City pays the entire monthly premium for employees and their eligible dependents

• Vision Insurance - City pays the entire monthly premium for employees and their eligible dependents

• $150 per year to offset medical insurance co-payments and/or deductibles

• Life Insurance - $25,000

• Accidental Death & Dismemberment Insurance - $25,000

• State Disability Insurance – Premium paid by Employee

• Credit Union

• Employee Assistance Program

• YMCA Membership – City will provide a paid annual membership for Employee to the Redlands YMCA.

• Retiree Health – upon retirement from the City and CalPERS, Employee will be eligible for medical coverage as provided through CalPERS. The City will contribute $397 per month towards the medical premium.

• Tuition Reimbursement - $2500 per year reimbursement for courses successfully taken at an accredited institution.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
460 of 932
City Manager Salary Benefits Survey 8/29/2024
City Population CM Salary Salary Range Deferred Comp Car Allowance Annual Leave Other Redlands 73,288 $ 305,592.00 $285,000 - $349,992 $ 44,904.29 $ 500.00 430 1 Colton 54,285 $ 290,000.00 0 $ 250.00 320 - 480 (based on years of service) Pays 3% of Employer PERS
2 San Bernardino 222,203 $ 325,000.00 0 $ 775.00 80 - 500(based on years of service)
(CM dismissed, recruitment
in process for replacement)
3 Fontana 210,716 $ 337,428.00 $ 6,750.00 Vehicle 304-392 (based on years of service)
4 Riverside 317,261 $ 350,196.00 $ 30,000.00 $ 625.00 280 Riverside County 5 Rialto 104,394 $ 354,984.00
$750/month after 3
years of
employment
Vehicle 380 (CM retired, recruitment in
process for replacement)
6 Ontario 177,963 $ 369,756.00 $320,484 - $426,000 $ 27,731.00 Vehicle 240 - 320 (based on years of service)
Population CM Salary Salary Range Deferred Comp Car Allowance Annual Leave Other 1 Upland 78,841 $ 273,573.00 $258,065 - $329,363 $ 51,979.00 0 128 SB County 2 Beaumont 56,349 $ 241,633.00 $218,919 - $280,238 0 Vehicle or $325 336 Riverside County *contracts Fire Services
3 Chino 93,140 $ 302,752.00 $ 21,192.00 $ 533.33 330-410 (based on
years of service) SB Country
4 Hemet 90,689 $ 278,460.00 $ 11,138.40 $ 500.00 204-266 (based on years of service) Riverside County
Table 1: Includes our normal comparison cities utilized to conduct employee salary surveys.

Table 2: Includes additional cities either geographically close to Redlands and somewhat similar in population.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
461 of 932
2023 Government Compensation in California from the California State Controller's Office

1. 576 positions listed including some duplicates due to interim or split year appointments

2. Of these 576, 173 City Manager positions paying above Redlands

3. At salary of $320,000 there will still be 113 City Manager positions paying higher than Redlands – this does not include possible increases since 2023

4. There are 432 listings (including a few duplicates) with a population lower than Redlands

5. Of the 432 listed, 47 of those with a lower population than Redlands pay $320,000 or higher Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
462 of 932
Position Other Positions Held City City Population County Total Wages Total Retirement 1 City Manager Commerce 12,124 Los Angeles County $639,326 $72,191 2 City Manager Sacramento 520,407 Sacramento County $593,240 $64,058 3 City Manager Pomona 152,166 Los Angeles County $584,525 $50,392 4 City Manager Rialto 103,097 San Bernardino County $555,092 $6,706 5 City Manager Suisun City 28,840 Solano County $523,926 $51,942 6 City Manager Laguna Beach 22,449 Orange County $514,080 $37,681 7 City Manager Huntington Beach 192,503 Orange County $506,983 $49,388 8 City Manager Inglewood 106,065 Los Angeles County $503,737 $117,537 9 City Manager Salinas 162,037 Monterey County $498,594 $49,393 10 City Manager Beverly Hills 31,806 Los Angeles County $477,790 $152,338 11 City Manager Vista 99,723 San Diego County $457,312 $19,885 12 City Manager Brisbane 4,661 San Mateo County $455,277 $75,083 13 City Manager Daly City 101,458 San Mateo County $434,537 $79,272 14 City Manager Sunnyvale 157,566 Santa Clara County $429,201 $137,090 15 City Manager Pasadena 139,692 Los Angeles County $429,131 $58,503 16 City Manager U San Jose 969,491 Santa Clara County $425,101 $79,215 17 City Manager San Carlos 29,420 San Mateo County $424,881 $90,507 18 City Manager (Em) Santa Ana 310,797 Orange County $424,518 $81,189 19 City Manager Palo Alto 67,973 Santa Clara County $413,330 $205,471 20 City Manager Fremont 229,250 Alameda County $411,911 $95,213 21 City Manager Irvine 314,550 Orange County $411,082 $51,819 22 City Manager Montebello 61,930 Los Angeles County $403,850 $57,430 23 City Manager Pinole 18,192 Contra Costa County $403,027 $33,428 24 City Manager Ontario Housing Ontario 181,224 San Bernardino County $397,440 $87,700 25 City Administrator Placentia 52,226 Orange County $396,799 $74,182 26 City Manager Carson 91,924 Los Angeles County $394,925 $66,780 27 City Manager Hesperia 100,087 San Bernardino County $392,301 $43,391 28 A100 City Manager Redwood City 81,863 San Mateo County $390,980 $122,254 29 City Manager Mountain View 86,535 Santa Clara County $388,690 $86,848 30 City Manager Costa Mesa 109,423 Orange County $382,675 $77,753 31 City Manager Hayward 159,770 Alameda County $381,431 $40,721 32 City Manager Carlsbad 114,319 San Diego County $380,742 $90,778 33 City Manager Culver City 40,213 Los Angeles County $380,560 $51,656 34 Interim City Manager South San Francisco 64,601 San Mateo County $380,057 $31,211 35 City Manager Dublin 72,917 Alameda County $379,190 $64,369 36 0025 City Manager Santa Monica 92,912 Los Angeles County $377,589 $61,692 37 City Manager Torrance 142,910 Los Angeles County $375,994 $30,587 38 City Manager Moreno Valley 207,146 Riverside County $375,515 $66,412 39 City Manager Chino Hills 76,414 San Bernardino County $374,337 $118,170 40 City Manager Pacific Grove 14,966 Monterey County $373,487 $19,901 41 City Manager Pico Rivera 60,820 Los Angeles County $373,252 $34,684 42 City Administrative Los Angeles 3,814,318 Los Angeles County $372,980 $50,324 43 1040 City Mgr. Berkeley 125,327 Alameda County $372,483 $139,440 44 City Manager West Hollywood 35,075 Los Angeles County $371,970 $82,767 45 City Manager Fontana 214,223 San Bernardino County $369,562 $99,216 46 City Manager Rancho Cucamonga 173,316 San Bernardino County $369,268 $244,274 47 City Manager Lake Elsinore 71,452 Riverside County $366,588 $57,205 48 City Manager Aliso Viejo 50,068 Orange County $365,288 $84,962 49 City Manager Norwalk 101,172 Los Angeles County $364,200 $185,020 50 City Manager Morgan Hill 46,384 Santa Clara County $363,837 $68,318 51 City Manager Lancaster 172,631 Los Angeles County $362,738 $114,361 52 City Manager Oxnard 197,536 Ventura County $362,301 $59,704 53 City Manager Foster City 32,581 San Mateo County $361,982 $62,097 54 City Manager Long Beach 458,813 Los Angeles County $361,973 $140,509 55 City Manager Menifee 111,560 Riverside County $358,297 $90,906 56 City Manager Santa Clarita 230,428 Los Angeles County $356,767 $97,254 57 City Manager Belmont 26,931 San Mateo County $356,512 $67,761 58 City Manager Richmond 112,735 Contra Costa County $356,156 $105,504 59 City Manager Riverside 316,690 Riverside County $355,725 $39,856 60 City Manager Corona 156,615 Riverside County $355,232 $64,283 61 City Manager Murrieta 109,177 Riverside County $351,930 $81,784 62 City Manager Campbell 43,095 Santa Clara County $350,231 $81,216 63 City Manager Burbank 105,603 Los Angeles County $348,895 $37,149 64 City Manager Perris 79,311 Riverside County $348,503 $71,348 65 City Administrator Vernon 205 Los Angeles County $347,053 $49,303 66 City Manager Roseville 154,329 Placer County $344,911 $76,191 2023 Government Compensation in California from the California State Controller's Office sorted by Total Wages Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
463 of 932
67 City Manager Anaheim 340,160 Orange County $344,873 $46,112 68 City Manager Temecula 108,700 Riverside County $344,195 $190,748 69 City Manager Beverly Hills 31,806 Los Angeles County $342,919 $5,529 70 City Manager Rancho Mirage 16,992 Riverside County $341,771 $63,913 71 City Manager Tustin 78,844 Orange County $340,087 $61,499 72 City Manager San Leandro 87,098 Alameda County $339,313 $191,612 73 City Manager Delano 52,484 Kern County $338,356 $105,875 74 City Manager South Gate 92,729 Los Angeles County $337,738 $74,881 75 City Manager Elk Grove 178,679 Sacramento County $337,039 $80,578 76 City Manager Brea 47,725 Orange County $336,131 $61,660 77 City Manager Thousand Oaks 122,643 Ventura County $335,932 $100,902 78 City Manager Chula Vista 278,247 San Diego County $335,655 $79,600 79 City Manager Montclair 37,211 San Bernardino County $335,557 $98,305 80 City Manager National City 58,555 San Diego County $334,953 $20,167 81 City Manager Santa Maria 110,608 Santa Barbara County $334,830 $60,828 82 City Manager Newport Beach 82,419 Orange County $334,758 $89,159 83 City Manager El Cajon 104,180 San Diego County $334,052 $54,782 84 1101 City Manager Stockton 317,204 San Joaquin County $334,022 $81,321 85 City Manager Union City 66,432 Alameda County $333,728 $69,069 86 City Manager Cypress 49,345 Orange County $332,669 $61,865 87 City Manager Seal Beach 24,350 Orange County $332,093 $71,085 88 City Manager Arcadia 55,783 Los Angeles County $331,826 $70,986 89 City Manager Victorville 138,202 San Bernardino County $330,630 $60,891 90 City Manager Industry 426 Los Angeles County $330,468 $100,372 91 City Manager Indian Wells 4,797 Riverside County $329,474 $95,398 92 City Manager Vacaville 102,173 Solano County $329,244 $33,008 93 City Administrator Santa Barbara 85,679 Santa Barbara County $329,106 $58,423 94 City Manager Glendale 191,586 Los Angeles County $329,057 $152,009 95 City Manager Pleasant Hill 33,352 Contra Costa County $328,628 $27,134 96 City Manager Livermore 84,828 Alameda County $327,434 $127,352 97 City Manager Concord 121,513 Contra Costa County $326,696 $87,239 98 City Manager El Segundo 16,964 Los Angeles County $326,041 $54,795 99 City Manager Davis 65,054 Yolo County $325,008 $58,923 100 City Manager Camarillo 69,014 Ventura County $324,593 $94,757 101 City Manager Hillsborough 11,116 San Mateo County $324,496 $28,559 102 City Manager Lynwood 66,271 Los Angeles County $324,232 $168,704 103 City Manager Lathrop 37,033 San Joaquin County $324,075 $61,358 104 City Manager Cupertino 59,471 Santa Clara County $323,954 $58,790 105 City Manager Pleasanton 75,960 Alameda County $322,975 $48,589 106 City Manager Lakewood 80,162 Los Angeles County $322,829 $54,625 107 City Manager Glendora 51,209 Los Angeles County $322,781 $60,889 108 City Manager Escondido 150,002 San Diego County $322,072 $57,622 109 2001 City Administrator Gilroy 61,033 Santa Clara County $321,145 $57,501 110 City Manager Azusa 49,420 Los Angeles County $321,054 $77,450 111 City Manager El Monte 106,786 Los Angeles County $320,465 $61,401 112 City Manager Palm Desert 50,889 Riverside County $320,346 $81,848 113 City Manager Gardena 60,028 Los Angeles County $320,336 $80,243 114 City Manager Chino 92,585 San Bernardino County $319,930 $71,309 115 City Manager Brentwood 64,811 Contra Costa County $319,769 $61,066 116 City Manager Newark 46,635 Alameda County $319,655 $191,683 117 City Manager Los Altos 31,255 Santa Clara County $319,118 $38,948 118 Town Manager Apple Valley 74,322 San Bernardino County $318,391 $44,484 119 Interim City Huntington Beach 192,503 Orange County $317,697 $37,132 120 City Manager Poway 49,273 San Diego County $317,539 $81,386 121 City Manager Mission Viejo 91,304 Orange County $316,451 $49,012 122 City Manager Woodland 60,672 Yolo County $315,828 $57,818 123 City Manager Albany 20,325 Alameda County $314,403 $65,992 124 City Manager Simi Valley 124,029 Ventura County $313,840 $60,633 125 City Manager Atherton 6,976 San Mateo County $313,316 $34,337 126 City Manager Modesto 217,862 Stanislaus County $312,947 $66,835 127 City Manager Goleta 32,515 Santa Barbara County $312,440 $50,794 128 City Manager Redondo Beach 68,239 Los Angeles County $312,346 $74,432 129 City Manager San Juan Capistrano 34,992 Orange County $312,318 $68,827 130 City Manager Agoura Hills 19,841 Los Angeles County $312,141 $84,665 131 City Manager Fairfield 120,339 Solano County $311,981 $77,607 132 City Manager Half Moon Bay 11,238 San Mateo County $311,894 $49,403 133 City Manager Walnut Creek 69,433 Contra Costa County $311,738 $63,679 134 City Manager Laguna Niguel 64,291 Orange County $311,706 $37,111 135 City Manager Oceanside 171,483 San Diego County $311,138 $48,340 Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
464 of 932
136 City Manager Yucaipa 53,810 San Bernardino County $311,043 $6,402 137 City Manager Lake Forest 86,917 Orange County $310,806 $54,572 138 City Manager Yorba Linda 66,087 Orange County $310,576 $78,904 139 Dir City Manager's San Jose 969,491 Santa Clara County $309,955 $31,493 140 City Manager Palmdale 166,055 Los Angeles County $309,942 $76,587 141 City Manager Atascadero 30,279 San Luis Obispo County $309,403 $46,771 142 1100 City Manager Rohnert Park 43,821 Sonoma County $308,881 $62,185 143 City Manager Rancho Santa Margarita 46,305 Orange County $308,433 $27,499 144 Cm04 City Manager Napa 77,174 Napa County $307,661 $51,179 145 City Manager Westlake Village 7,902 Los Angeles County $307,602 $95,829 146 City Manager Garden Grove 171,024 Orange County $307,566 $150,187 147 City Manager Saratoga 30,819 Santa Clara County $306,944 $80,220 148 City Manager Orange 138,621 Orange County $306,635 $47,990 149 City Manager Hollister 42,872 San Benito County $306,275 $15,977 150 City Manager Manhattan Beach 34,195 Los Angeles County $305,724 $46,856 151 City Manager Pittsburg 75,085 Contra Costa County $305,233 $36,230 152 City Manager Redding 92,446 Shasta County $305,025 $54,103 153 City Manager Santa Rosa 174,890 Sonoma County $304,414 $44,972 154 City Manager Healdsburg 10,985 Sonoma County $303,994 $38,598 155 City Manager Folsom 88,023 Sacramento County $303,068 $155,930 156 Town Manager Danville 42,567 Contra Costa County $301,939 $124,631 157 City Manager Hermosa Beach 19,088 Los Angeles County $301,535 $37,097 158 City Manager Milpitas 81,773 Santa Clara County $300,641 $49,109 159 City Manager Novato 51,140 Marin County $300,619 $51,671 160 City Manager Menlo Park 33,140 San Mateo County $300,377 $48,694 161 City Manager Santa Cruz 62,776 Santa Cruz County $300,314 $43,595 162 Acting City Manager Commerce 12,124 Los Angeles County $300,262 $74,605 163 City Manager Alameda 78,071 Alameda County $299,842 $30,826 164 City Manager Port Hueneme 20,916 Ventura County $299,433 $4,229 165 City Manager San Luis Obispo 48,684 San Luis Obispo County $297,251 $38,608 166 City Manager Alhambra 81,811 Los Angeles County $297,180 $51,121 167 City Manager Palm Springs 43,791 Riverside County $297,125 $107,305 168 City Manager San Pablo 31,088 Contra Costa County $295,932 $73,958 169 City Manager Dixon 19,403 Solano County $295,562 $175,017 170 City Manager Dana Point 32,596 Orange County $295,539 $62,930 171 City Manager Millbrae 23,093 San Mateo County $295,466 $42,925 172 City Manager Lafayette 24,808 Contra Costa County $295,400 $83,713 173 Police Chief City Manager Pinole 18,192 Contra Costa County $295,304 $45,222 174 City Manager Redlands 72,696 San Bernardino County $294,942 $88,420 175 City Manager San Rafael 59,585 Marin County $294,590 $181,965 176 City Manager Encinitas 61,028 San Diego County $294,517 $82,381 177 City Manager Vallejo 121,558 Solano County $294,180 $48,336 178 City Manager Diamond Bar 53,335 Los Angeles County $293,698 $67,898 179 City Manager Public Works Loma Linda 24,965 San Bernardino County $291,226 $48,255 180 City Manager Solana Beach 12,887 San Diego County $290,943 $63,077 181 City Manager Bellflower 76,990 Los Angeles County $290,543 $78,482 182 City Manager Buena Park 82,689 Orange County $290,301 $81,528 183 City Manager Wildomar 36,327 Riverside County $289,525 $67,680 184 City Manager Whittier 87,527 Los Angeles County $289,476 $35,759 185 City Manager Cotati 7,303 Sonoma County $288,685 $62,539 186 City Manager/Exec Dir Covina 50,485 Los Angeles County $287,635 $28,115 187 City Manager Claremont 37,686 Los Angeles County $287,623 $42,656 188 City Manager Laguna Hills 30,315 Orange County $287,581 $88,151 189 City Manager Manteca 90,917 San Joaquin County $286,440 $22,153 190 City Manager La Habra 60,901 Orange County $285,706 $72,416 191 City Manager Del Mar 3,919 San Diego County $285,233 $41,748 192 City Manager Greenfield 20,561 Monterey County $285,051 $36,980 193 City Manager Vista 99,723 San Diego County $284,389 $88,380 194 City Manager La Mesa 60,620 San Diego County $284,100 $71,862 195 City Manager San Marcos 95,998 San Diego County $283,146 $50,480 196 City Manager Marina 22,695 Monterey County $282,164 $32,078 197 City Manager West Sacramento 54,278 Yolo County $282,047 $69,391 198 1000 City Manager Ukiah 16,108 Mendocino County $281,755 $63,807 199 City Manager Bell Gardens 38,381 Los Angeles County $281,527 $65,996 200 City Manager Fresno 546,971 Fresno County $281,035 $43,285 201 City Manager Indio 90,680 Riverside County $280,979 $75,323 202 City Manager (New) Rancho Cordova 82,109 Sacramento County $279,958 $48,454 203 City Manager Clovis 126,133 Fresno County $279,599 $80,607 204 City Manager Westminster 89,490 Orange County $279,514 $39,110 Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
465 of 932
205 City Manager Upland 78,285 San Bernardino County $279,447 $67,538 206 City Manager Burlingame 30,513 San Mateo County $277,585 $49,570 207 City Manager Coronado 21,589 San Diego County $276,930 $65,470 208 Dir City Manager's San Jose 969,491 Santa Clara County $276,514 $78,145 209 City Manager Rancho Palos Verdes 40,919 Los Angeles County $276,506 $55,452 210 City Manager Paramount 52,153 Los Angeles County $276,496 $87,444 211 City Manager San Clemente 62,297 Orange County $276,384 $41,177 212 City Manager Calabasas 22,742 Los Angeles County $276,092 $71,153 213 Town Manager Los Gatos 33,230 Santa Clara County $275,349 $42,803 214 City Manager San Jacinto 53,538 Riverside County $275,118 $63,490 215 City Manager Citrus Heights 85,554 Sacramento County $274,315 $57,212 216 City Manager Merced 91,837 Merced County $274,166 $39,475 217 City Manager Highland 55,676 San Bernardino County $273,760 $68,205 218 City Manager Pacifica 37,062 San Mateo County $273,252 $79,062 219 City Manager American Canyon 21,758 Napa County $273,159 $56,056 220 City Manager Oakley 45,736 Contra Costa County $272,752 $89,101 221 City Manager/Executive Emeryville 13,314 Alameda County $272,500 $22,005 222 City Manager San Dimas 33,920 Los Angeles County $272,204 $50,157 223 City Manager Hercules 26,063 Contra Costa County $271,116 $43,013 224 Dir City Manager's San Jose 969,491 Santa Clara County $270,232 $12,050 225 City Manager Lodi 66,492 San Joaquin County $270,204 $37,116 226 City Manager Tehachapi 11,092 Kern County $270,181 $60,630 227 City Manager Hillsborough 11,116 San Mateo County $270,033 $79,421 228 City Manager Santee 59,195 San Diego County $268,932 $55,193 229 City Manager Santa Clara 132,048 Santa Clara County $268,745 $34,762 230 City Manager Moorpark 35,114 Ventura County $268,161 $90,237 231 City Manager Fountain Valley 56,333 Orange County $267,622 $50,201 232 Town Manager Ross 2,272 Marin County $267,602 $55,107 233 2011 City Manager Martinez 36,439 Contra Costa County $267,540 $80,422 234 City Manager Los Alamitos 11,947 Orange County $267,517 $32,446 235 City Manager Monterey 27,106 Monterey County $267,391 $56,969 236 City Manager San Ramon 82,525 Contra Costa County $267,242 $67,398 237 City Manager Larkspur 12,655 Marin County $266,968 $87,980 238 City Manager La Palma 15,071 Orange County $266,740 $29,494 239 City Manager Eastvale 68,884 Riverside County $265,707 $42,566 240 City Manager Compton 93,671 Los Angeles County $264,639 $26,920 241 City Manager Mill Valley 13,635 Marin County $264,474 $68,328 242 Town Manager Moraga 16,784 Contra Costa County $264,347 $0 243 City Manager Barstow 24,669 San Bernardino County $264,327 $22,664 244 City Manager Orinda 19,191 Contra Costa County $263,795 $64,672 245 Town Manager Tiburon 8,809 Marin County $262,696 $65,006 246 City Manager Colton 52,778 San Bernardino County $262,475 $32,869 247 City Manager La Quinta 38,370 Riverside County $262,326 $63,494 248 City Administrator Carmel-By-The-Sea 3,122 Monterey County $261,954 $83,407 249 City Manager Beaumont 57,416 Riverside County $261,940 $60,122 250 City Manager Carpinteria 12,744 Santa Barbara County $261,271 $60,814 251 City Manager Big Bear Lake 4,958 San Bernardino County $260,880 $133,648 252 City Manager La Mirada 48,077 Los Angeles County $260,532 $81,211 253 City Manager Monrovia 38,087 Los Angeles County $260,145 $42,751 254 City Manager Stanton 40,297 Orange County $260,133 $42,248 255 City Manager Imperial Beach 26,096 San Diego County $259,959 $56,291 256 City Manager Calistoga 5,142 Napa County $259,508 $43,980 257 City Manager Rosemead 50,541 Los Angeles County $259,421 $8,918 258 City Manager Hawthorne 85,566 Los Angeles County $258,959 $72,345 259 City Manager Scotts Valley 11,816 Santa Cruz County $258,813 $43,071 260 City Manager San Fernando 23,643 Los Angeles County $257,925 $69,511 261 City Manager Malibu 10,621 Los Angeles County $257,470 $54,955 262 Town Manager Yucca Valley 21,594 San Bernardino County $257,334 $63,110 263 City Manager Fullerton 140,311 Orange County $257,150 $48,250 264 City Manager Cathedral City 50,911 Riverside County $255,678 $61,068 265 City Manager San Mateo 103,352 San Mateo County $255,399 $25,189 266 City Manager La Puente 37,459 Los Angeles County $255,126 $34,074 267 City Manager Coachella 43,173 Riverside County $255,038 $34,264 268 City Manager Milpitas 81,773 Santa Clara County $254,959 $33,904 269 City Manager Rocklin 71,609 Placer County $254,919 $92,666 270 City Manager Lincoln 53,231 Placer County $254,866 $38,958 271 City Manager Seaside 30,197 Monterey County $254,693 $53,680 272 City Manager Los Altos Hills 8,476 Santa Clara County $254,489 $30,406 273 City Manager Patterson 24,790 Stanislaus County $254,410 $51,640 Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
466 of 932
274 City Manager South Pasadena 26,270 Los Angeles County $253,393 $51,693 275 City Manager City Attorney Sebastopol 7,295 Sonoma County $253,139 $50,097 276 City Manager San Gabriel 38,613 Los Angeles County $253,058 $42,968 277 City Manager Fillmore 17,061 Ventura County $252,785 $33,703 278 City Manager St. Helena 5,314 Napa County $252,654 $43,858 279 City Manager Walnut 27,867 Los Angeles County $252,471 $53,506 280 City Manager Signal Hill 11,448 Los Angeles County $252,081 $52,865 281 Town Manager Corte Madera 9,882 Marin County $251,925 $45,008 282 Town Manager Moraga 16,784 Contra Costa County $251,498 $56,712 283 City Manager Grass Valley 13,400 Nevada County $251,401 $67,134 284 City Manager Adelanto 36,131 San Bernardino County $251,120 $24,854 285 City Manager Capitola 9,497 Santa Cruz County $250,943 $79,202 286 City Manager Oakdale 23,008 Stanislaus County $250,117 $62,947 287 135 City Manager Lompoc 43,610 Santa Barbara County $249,926 $24,239 288 Town Manager San Anselmo 12,426 Marin County $249,729 $57,696 289 City Manager Visalia 144,532 Tulare County $249,140 $32,626 290 City Manager Pleasant Hill 33,352 Contra Costa County $248,454 $58,319 291 City Manager Irwindale 1,499 Los Angeles County $247,730 $55,665 292 City Manager Petaluma 58,445 Sonoma County $247,693 $41,756 293 City Manager Pismo Beach 7,846 San Luis Obispo County $246,942 $41,291 294 Town Manager Woodside 5,133 San Mateo County $246,814 $53,873 295 City Manager Lomita 20,320 Los Angeles County $246,349 $72,395 296 Interm City Manager Pomona 152,166 Los Angeles County $246,095 $21,516 297 City Manager Hollister 42,872 San Benito County $246,009 $57,456 298 Town Manager Fairfax 7,371 Marin County $244,604 $50,092 299 City Manager Grand Terrace 12,771 San Bernardino County $244,579 $39,030 300 City Manager Watsonville 51,032 Santa Cruz County $244,104 $45,160 301 City Manager Turlock 71,273 Stanislaus County $243,880 $29,652 302 City Manager Norco 25,068 Riverside County $243,512 $145,664 303 City Manager Monterey Park 59,347 Los Angeles County $242,985 $25,696 304 City Manager Jurupa Valley 104,721 Riverside County $242,732 $16,146 305 Town Manager Mammoth Lakes 7,110 Mono County $242,220 $64,714 306 1100 City Manager Shafter 22,226 Kern County $242,205 $20,311 307 City Manager Port Hueneme 20,916 Ventura County $241,874 $36,502 308 City Manager Banning 31,213 Riverside County $241,146 $33,996 309 City Manager El Cerrito 25,700 Contra Costa County $241,080 $40,382 310 City Manager El Paso De Robles 30,907 San Luis Obispo County $240,992 $42,699 311 City Manager Reedley 25,653 Fresno County $240,657 $57,585 312 City Manager Ridgecrest 27,940 Kern County $240,370 $32,086 313 City Manager Bakersfield 411,109 Kern County $240,003 $23,373 314 City Manager Hemet 89,663 Riverside County $239,844 $123,185 315 City Manager Santa Paula 31,355 Ventura County $239,129 $35,448 316 City Manager San Marcos 95,998 San Diego County $237,357 $53,155 317 City Manager Hanford 59,286 Kings County $237,085 $31,471 318 City Manager Grover Beach 12,481 San Luis Obispo County $236,247 $54,194 319 City Manager La Verne 31,697 Los Angeles County $235,402 $29,621 320 City Manager Hawaiian Gardens 13,560 Los Angeles County $235,057 $64,295 321 City Manager Yuba City 70,256 Sutter County $234,981 $50,899 322 Public Works Director Interim Town Manager Portola Valley 4,249 San Mateo County $233,550 $66,837 323 City Manager Tulare 70,799 Tulare County $232,522 $14,067 324 City Manager Anderson 10,943 Shasta County $232,464 $29,808 325 City Manager Cerritos 47,806 Los Angeles County $232,396 $69,814 326 City Manager Hesperia 100,087 San Bernardino County $232,351 $88,089 327 City Manager Interim Arroyo Grande 17,941 San Luis Obispo County $231,875 $47,214 328 City Manager Artesia 16,019 Los Angeles County $231,131 $33,396 329 City Administrator/City Ripon 15,741 San Joaquin County $229,823 $65,052 330 City Manager Selma 24,371 Fresno County $228,749 $38,645 331 Town Manager Truckee 16,778 Nevada County $228,192 $85,155 332 City Manager Calimesa 10,867 Riverside County $227,685 $49,100 333 City Manager Downey 111,493 Los Angeles County $226,927 $43,097 334 City Manager Sierra Madre 10,909 Los Angeles County $225,801 $49,406 335 City Manager Bell 33,301 Los Angeles County $225,021 $66,713 336 2011 City Manager Martinez 36,439 Contra Costa County $224,608 $15,370 337 City Manager Cudahy 22,210 Los Angeles County $224,560 $25,679 338 City Manager Sausalito 6,856 Marin County $223,851 $39,465 339 City Manager Atwater 31,397 Merced County $223,798 $45,061 340 City Manager Belvedere 2,043 Marin County $223,597 $56,587 341 City Manager Rolling Hills Estates 8,534 Los Angeles County $223,207 $46,297 342 City Manager San Bruno 42,152 San Mateo County $223,079 $41,664 Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
467 of 932
343 City Manager Buellton 4,970 Santa Barbara County $222,950 $71,100 344 City Manager Sand City 379 Monterey County $222,237 $40,453 345 City Manager Duarte 23,656 Los Angeles County $222,137 $53,233 346 City Manager Huntington Park 53,219 Los Angeles County $220,903 $57,278 347 Town Manager Windsor 25,394 Sonoma County $220,880 $57,870 348 City Manager South Lake Tahoe 20,790 El Dorado County $220,736 $66,658 349 City Administrator Chowchilla 18,930 Madera County $219,993 $13,532 350 City Manager Avalon 3,313 Los Angeles County $219,491 $30,946 351 City Manager Twentynine Palms 25,346 San Bernardino County $217,891 $36,044 352 City Manager San Rafael 59,585 Marin County $217,817 $114,074 353 City Manager El Centro 44,952 Imperial County $217,404 $28,140 354 City Manager Wasco 27,028 Kern County $216,685 $46,516 355 City Manager Temple City 35,975 Los Angeles County $216,478 $44,127 356 Pw Director/City Colusa 6,447 Colusa County $214,575 $38,443 357 City Manager Finance Director Arvin 19,651 Kern County $214,519 $64,000 358 Interim City Manager Novato 51,140 Marin County $214,516 $40,340 359 City Manager Newman 12,121 Stanislaus County $213,862 $59,691 360 City Manager Galt 25,785 Sacramento County $213,517 $25,050 361 City Manager Chico 109,589 Butte County $213,079 $46,283 362 City Manager (U) San Bernardino 226,541 San Bernardino County $212,891 $2,815 363 City Manager Arcata 18,540 Humboldt County $211,616 $50,859 364 City Manager East Palo Alto 29,078 San Mateo County $211,485 $36,482 365 City Manager Lawndale 30,855 Los Angeles County $211,094 $33,903 366 City Manager King City 14,216 Monterey County $211,048 $59,284 367 City Manager Kingsburg 13,042 Fresno County $209,917 $38,378 368 City Manager Clearlake 16,553 Lake County $209,804 $46,420 369 City Manager Yucaipa 53,810 San Bernardino County $209,287 $55,739 370 City Manager Imperial 22,141 Imperial County $209,078 $15,014 371 City Manager Cloverdale 8,710 Sonoma County $208,993 $53,765 372 City Manager Del Rey Oaks 1,569 Monterey County $208,271 $63,774 373 City Manager Laguna Woods 17,148 Orange County $207,257 $32,458 374 City Manager South El Monte 19,441 Los Angeles County $206,961 $24,844 375 City Administrator Piedmont 10,782 Alameda County $206,519 $41,987 376 City Manager Shasta Lake 10,131 Shasta County $205,813 $59,628 377 City Manager Madera 66,560 Madera County $204,946 $32,717 378 City Manager Hidden Hills 1,727 Los Angeles County $204,415 $47,842 379 City Manager Mendota 12,531 Fresno County $204,172 $12,380 380 City Manager Auburn 13,218 Placer County $203,647 $34,992 381 City Administrator Oakland 425,093 Alameda County $203,384 $91,204 382 City Manager Cerritos 47,806 Los Angeles County $203,094 $66,615 383 City Manager Fowler 7,367 Fresno County $202,396 $43,019 384 City Manager Merced 91,837 Merced County $201,144 $17,810 385 City Manager Pismo Beach 7,846 San Luis Obispo County $201,089 $34,915 386 City Manager Nevada City 3,347 Nevada County $200,561 $50,310 387 City Manager Ceres 49,319 Stanislaus County $200,389 $20,779 388 City Manager Waterford 9,110 Stanislaus County $200,241 $63,135 389 City Manager Riverbank 25,006 Stanislaus County $199,099 $60,220 390 City Manager Winters 7,587 Yolo County $198,496 $33,490 391 City Manager Eureka 26,073 Humboldt County $196,791 $43,483 392 City Manager Maywood 24,451 Los Angeles County $196,677 $70,124 393 City Manager Dinuba 25,573 Tulare County $195,857 $51,226 394 City Manager Corcoran 21,633 Kings County $193,998 $50,859 395 City Manager/Retiree Downey 111,493 Los Angeles County $193,390 $0 396 City Manager Lemon Grove 27,568 San Diego County $192,958 $28,822 397 City Manager Marysville 12,752 Yuba County $191,807 $32,740 398 City Manager Colma 1,410 San Mateo County $191,674 $43,650 399 City Manager Porterville 62,934 Tulare County $191,671 $25,217 400 City Manager La Habra Heights 5,488 Los Angeles County $191,613 $31,468 401 City Manager Monte Sereno 3,582 Santa Clara County $191,100 $58,803 402 City Manager Human Resources Coalinga 17,107 Fresno County $190,480 $56,895 403 City Manager Desert Hot Springs 32,654 Riverside County $189,970 $34,953 404 City Manager La Canada Flintridge 20,048 Los Angeles County $188,186 $21,291 405 City Administrator Susanville 11,639 Lassen County $184,847 $59,157 406 City Manager Gonzales 8,466 Monterey County $184,699 $51,358 407 City Manager McFarland 13,965 Kern County $184,539 $17,814 408 City Administrator Gridley 6,935 Butte County $184,155 $17,057 409 City Administrator Oroville 18,129 Butte County $184,017 $30,773 410 Town Manager Yountville 2,781 Napa County $183,515 $41,373 411 City Manager Live Oak 9,668 Sutter County $183,174 $41,648 Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
468 of 932
412 City Manager Kerman 17,256 Fresno County $181,542 $31,873 413 City Manager Lemoore 26,855 Kings County $180,805 $50,865 414 City Manager Arroyo Grande 17,941 San Luis Obispo County $180,240 $26,940 415 City Manager Lakeport 4,982 Lake County $179,962 $21,917 416 City Manager Red Bluff 14,300 Tehama County $179,218 $48,950 417 City Manager Calexico 39,262 Imperial County $178,802 $36,329 418 City Manager National City 58,555 San Diego County $178,568 $19,253 419 City Manager Willits 4,830 Mendocino County $178,133 $24,284 420 City Administrator Sonora 5,132 Tuolumne County $177,511 $32,729 421 City Manager Bradbury 898 Los Angeles County $176,667 $52,330 422 City Manager Farmersville 10,327 Tulare County $176,607 $38,722 423 City Manager Placerville 10,540 El Dorado County $176,304 $57,081 424 City Manager Firebaugh 8,415 Fresno County $175,659 $63,035 425 City Manager Rolling Hills 1,677 Los Angeles County $175,560 $29,628 426 City Manager Wheatland 3,893 Yuba County $175,555 $6,236 427 City Manager Canyon Lake 10,832 Riverside County $174,167 $46,748 428 City Manager Weed 2,710 Siskiyou County $173,830 $30,869 429 City Administrator Woodlake 7,713 Tulare County $173,715 $36,406 430 City Clerk City Manager Blythe 17,378 Riverside County $171,283 $58,051 431 City Manager National City 58,555 San Diego County $171,267 $27,808 432 City Administrator Williams 5,528 Colusa County $170,504 $25,837 433 1100 City Manager Rohnert Park 43,821 Sonoma County $170,025 $9,768 434 City Manager Antioch 115,632 Contra Costa County $169,946 $26,252 435 City Manager Tracy 96,609 San Joaquin County $169,052 $28,839 436 City Administrator Exeter 10,179 Tulare County $168,856 $38,324 437 City Manager Lindsay 12,594 Tulare County $168,007 $39,653 438 City Manager Brawley 28,345 Imperial County $167,028 $43,840 439 City Manager Porterville 62,934 Tulare County $166,591 $21,782 440 Interim City Manager Livingston 14,286 Merced County $166,449 $30,553 441 City Manager Ione 8,856 Amador County $166,241 $0
442 City Administrator Bishop 3,848 Inyo County $165,296 $58,771 443 City Manager Escalon 7,249 San Joaquin County $162,555 $38,553 444 City Manager San Joaquin 3,616 Fresno County $162,303 $28,604 445 City Manager Livingston 14,286 Merced County $161,307 $16,546 446 City Manager Hughson 7,711 Stanislaus County $160,105 $29,362 447 City Manager Fortuna 12,181 Humboldt County $159,980 $28,606 448 City Manager Needles 4,769 San Bernardino County $158,840 $14,261 449 City Manager Ojai 7,533 Ventura County $158,639 $22,580 450 City Administrator Gridley 6,935 Butte County $157,123 $38,039 451 City Administrator Guadalupe 8,676 Santa Barbara County $156,841 $27,049 452 Public Affairs Officer - Long Beach 458,813 Los Angeles County $156,555 $65,457 453 City Manager Willows 6,321 Glenn County $155,343 $27,706 454 Town Manager Loomis 6,601 Placer County $153,262 $22,086 455 City Manager Parlier 14,368 Fresno County $152,120 $30,173 456 City Manager Sanger 26,357 Fresno County $151,916 $33,771 457 City Manager Yreka 7,805 Siskiyou County $150,248 $34,876 458 City Manager Jackson 4,867 Amador County $149,551 $52,359 459 City Manager Mt. Shasta 3,203 Siskiyou County $148,800 $32,096 460 City Manager Crescent City 5,564 Del Norte County $148,062 $42,302 461 City Manager Rio Dell 3,241 Humboldt County $147,935 $31,589 462 City Manager Sonoma 10,532 Sonoma County $146,873 $25,949 463 City Manager San Juan Bautista 2,032 San Benito County $145,988 $10,685 464 City Manager Soledad 26,966 Monterey County $145,401 $16,499 465 City Administrator Angels 3,587 Calaveras County $145,331 $1,347 466 City Manager Plymouth 1,061 Amador County $145,297 $0 467 City Manager Oceanside 171,483 San Diego County $144,723 $10,902 468 City Manager San Ramon 82,525 Contra Costa County $144,349 $4,114 469 City Manager Clayton 10,683 Contra Costa County $141,666 $33,547 470 City Administrator Oakland 425,093 Alameda County $138,301 $20,276 471 City Manager City Clerk Villa Park 5,705 Orange County $137,041 $17,469 472 City Manager Santa Clara 132,048 Santa Clara County $131,347 $23,208 473 City Manager Dunsmuir 1,651 Siskiyou County $131,100 $32,690 474 City Manager Palos Verdes Estates 12,974 Los Angeles County $130,486 $26,042 475 City Manager San Bruno 42,152 San Mateo County $129,836 $22,884 476 Interim City Manager Portola 2,075 Plumas County $129,594 $9,088 477 City Manager Santa Fe Springs 18,640 Los Angeles County $127,890 $1,365 478 City Manager Solvang 5,663 Santa Barbara County $126,792 $9,642 479 City Manager La Canada Flintridge 20,048 Los Angeles County $125,610 $16,404 480 City Manager Imperial Beach 26,096 San Diego County $125,353 $12,652 Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
469 of 932
481 City Manager Holtville 5,583 Imperial County $123,801 $19,973 482 Town Manager Yountville 2,781 Napa County $123,577 $56,337 483 City Manager West Covina 109,105 Los Angeles County $122,780 $12,490 484 City Manager Ferndale 1,356 Humboldt County $122,231 $28,902 485 City Manager Jackson 4,867 Amador County $121,152 $32,369 486 City Manager Auburn 13,218 Placer County $120,783 $16,398 487 Interim City Manager Santa Fe Springs 18,640 Los Angeles County $120,290 $0 488 City Manager Rio Vista 10,004 Solano County $119,993 $22,741 489 City Manager Santa Fe Springs 18,640 Los Angeles County $118,993 $23,828 490 City Manager Duarte 23,656 Los Angeles County $118,707 $18,787 491 City Manager San Mateo 103,352 San Mateo County $118,558 $22,839 492 City Manager Ione 8,856 Amador County $118,154 $24,074 493 City Manager Ceres 49,319 Stanislaus County $117,101 $1,842 494 City Manager Atascadero 30,279 San Luis Obispo County $116,512 $47,534 495 City Manager Dos Palos 5,633 Merced County $114,925 $27,309 496 City Manager Gustine 5,936 Merced County $113,106 $28,951 497 City Manager Compton 93,671 Los Angeles County $112,260 $164 498 City Administrator Biggs 1,853 Butte County $111,219 $35,186 499 City Administrator Oakland 425,093 Alameda County $110,749 $41,724 500 City Manager San Marino 12,379 Los Angeles County $105,619 $29,043 501 City Manager San Buenaventura 107,569 Ventura County $105,143 $32,477 502 Public Works Supervisor Interim City Montague 1,199 Siskiyou County $101,630 $10,956 503 Interim City Manager Sutter Creek 2,553 Amador County $101,007 $0 504 City Administrator Piedmont 10,782 Alameda County $100,580 $10,005 505 City Manager Rio Vista 10,004 Solano County $97,782 $25,480 506 Town Manager Loomis 6,601 Placer County $96,228 $24,114 507 City Manager Isleton 767 Sacramento County $96,092 $1,041 508 City Manager Point Arena 445 Mendocino County $93,423 $19,225 509 Town Manager Portola Valley 4,249 San Mateo County $91,172 $21,679 510 City Manager Morro Bay 10,261 San Luis Obispo County $87,957 $9,962 511 City Manager Garden Grove 171,024 Orange County $87,850 $28,973 512 City Manager City Manager, City Trinidad 294 Humboldt County $87,835 $10,729 513 City Manager Morro Bay 10,261 San Luis Obispo County $86,858 $21,777 514 Interim City Manager Clayton 10,683 Contra Costa County $86,831 $0 515 Town Manager Portola Valley 4,249 San Mateo County $86,619 $12,749 516 City Manager Colfax 1,988 Placer County $85,606 $16,626 517 City Manager Blue Lake 1,149 Humboldt County $85,597 $30,982 518 City Manager Calipatria 6,342 Imperial County $84,784 $11,728 519 City Manager (Old) Rancho Cordova 82,109 Sacramento County $84,629 $921 520 Town Manager Paradise 10,691 Butte County $84,278 $16,175 521 City Manager Colma 1,410 San Mateo County $84,277 $19,053 522 Interim City Manager Morro Bay 10,261 San Luis Obispo County $82,819 $0 523 Interim City Manager Auburn 13,218 Placer County $78,358 $0 524 Interim City Manager Ojai 7,533 Ventura County $76,456 $22,426 525 City Manager Gonzales 8,466 Monterey County $74,313 $25,257 526 Town Manager Paradise 10,691 Butte County $73,420 $25,196 527 City Manager Sonoma 10,532 Sonoma County $72,030 $0 528 Interim City Manager Laguna Beach 22,449 Orange County $71,000 $0 529 City Manager Canyon Lake 10,832 Riverside County $70,524 $7,572 530 City Manager Calipatria 6,342 Imperial County $69,644 $10,887 531 Management Aide - City Duarte 23,656 Los Angeles County $66,521 $14,821 532 City Manager Corning 8,076 Tehama County $65,315 $17,936 533 Interim City Manager Ojai 7,533 Ventura County $64,902 $0 534 Interim City Manager Palos Verdes Estates 12,974 Los Angeles County $64,214 $0 535 City Clerk Water Operator, City Tehama 422 Tehama County $63,742 $7,161 536 Interim City Manager Soledad 26,966 Monterey County $63,652 $0 537 City Manager Sonoma 10,532 Sonoma County $57,253 $1,638 538 City Manager Sutter Creek 2,553 Amador County $55,754 $27,300 539 City Manager Solvang 5,663 Santa Barbara County $51,087 $0 540 City Manager Soledad 26,966 Monterey County $49,057 $332 541 City Manager Palos Verdes Estates 12,974 Los Angeles County $48,652 $12,656 542 City Manager Inglewood 106,065 Los Angeles County $47,647 $0 543 City Manager Amador 193 Amador County $44,900 $0
544 City Manager Gustine 5,936 Merced County $44,620 $0 545 City Manager Clayton 10,683 Contra Costa County $43,001 $2,759 546 City Administrator Oakland 425,093 Alameda County $42,180 $24,340 547 City Manager (U) San Bernardino 226,541 San Bernardino County $38,754 $5,985 548 City Manager Corning 8,076 Tehama County $36,825 $0 549 City Administrative Clerk Tulelake 870 Siskiyou County $35,791 $2,215 Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
470 of 932
550 Interim City Manager California City 13,079 Kern County $35,308 $0 551 City Manager (Tra) Downey 111,493 Los Angeles County $34,274 $0 552 City Administrator Dorris 836 Siskiyou County $33,962 $0 553 City Manager Winters 7,587 Yolo County $33,772 $1,772 554 City Manager Corning 8,076 Tehama County $32,209 $3,184 555 Interim City Manager Twentynine Palms 25,346 San Bernardino County $29,929 $0 556 City Manager California City 13,079 Kern County $28,891 $1,672 557 City Manager Desert Hot Springs 32,654 Riverside County $28,581 $3,739 558 City Manager Winters 7,587 Yolo County $28,575 $0
559 Interim City Manager San Clemente 62,297 Orange County $28,211 $0 560 City Administrator Dorris 836 Siskiyou County $27,016 $0 561 City Manager Rolling Hills 1,677 Los Angeles County $23,603 $1,916 562 Interim City Manager Pacific Grove 14,966 Monterey County $23,158 $0 563 Retired Town Manager Windsor 25,394 Sonoma County $21,374 $2,783 564 City Manager South San Francisco 64,601 San Mateo County $20,888 $1,263 565 City Manager Montebello 61,930 Los Angeles County $16,522 $2,035 566 City Manager South Gate 92,729 Los Angeles County $16,499 $1,433 567 Acting City Manager Hidden Hills 1,727 Los Angeles County $16,245 $3,785 568 Interim City Biggs 1,853 Butte County $12,375 $0
569 Interim City Biggs 1,853 Butte County $9,050 $0
570 City Administrator Dorris 836 Siskiyou County $6,531 $0 571 City Manager Huron 6,348 Fresno County $5,288 $0
572 City Manager Los Banos 47,419 Merced County $5,247 $0 573 City Manager Westmorland 2,050 Imperial County $1,740 $0 574 City Administrator Maricopa 1,004 Kern County $1,200 $0 575 Interim City Oroville 18,129 Butte County $1,013 $0 576 Interim City Manager La Verne 31,697 Los Angeles County $543 $0 Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
471 of 932
Position Other Positions Held City City Population County Total Wages Total Retirement 1 City Manager Amador 193 Amador County $44,900 $0
2 City Administrator Vernon 205 Los Angeles County $347,053 $49,303 3 City Manager City Manager, City Trinidad 294 Humboldt County $87,835 $10,729 4 City Manager Sand City 379 Monterey County $222,237 $40,453 5 City Clerk Water Operator, City Tehama 422 Tehama County $63,742 $7,161 6 City Manager Industry 426 Los Angeles County $330,468 $100,372 7 City Manager Point Arena 445 Mendocino County $93,423 $19,225 8 City Manager Isleton 767 Sacramento County $96,092 $1,041 9 City Administrator Dorris 836 Siskiyou County $33,962 $0 10 City Administrator Dorris 836 Siskiyou County $27,016 $0 11 City Administrator Dorris 836 Siskiyou County $6,531 $0 12 City Administrative Clerk Tulelake 870 Siskiyou County $35,791 $2,215 13 City Manager Bradbury 898 Los Angeles County $176,667 $52,330 14 City Administrator Maricopa 1,004 Kern County $1,200 $0 15 City Manager Plymouth 1,061 Amador County $145,297 $0 16 City Manager Blue Lake 1,149 Humboldt County $85,597 $30,982 17 Public Works Supervisor Interim City Montague 1,199 Siskiyou County $101,630 $10,956 18 City Manager Ferndale 1,356 Humboldt County $122,231 $28,902 19 City Manager Colma 1,410 San Mateo County $191,674 $43,650 20 City Manager Colma 1,410 San Mateo County $84,277 $19,053 21 City Manager Irwindale 1,499 Los Angeles County $247,730 $55,665 22 City Manager Del Rey Oaks 1,569 Monterey County $208,271 $63,774 23 City Manager Dunsmuir 1,651 Siskiyou County $131,100 $32,690 24 City Manager Rolling Hills 1,677 Los Angeles County $175,560 $29,628 25 City Manager Rolling Hills 1,677 Los Angeles County $23,603 $1,916 26 City Manager Hidden Hills 1,727 Los Angeles County $204,415 $47,842 27 Acting City Manager Hidden Hills 1,727 Los Angeles County $16,245 $3,785 28 City Administrator Biggs 1,853 Butte County $111,219 $35,186 29 Interim City Biggs 1,853 Butte County $12,375 $0
30 Interim City Biggs 1,853 Butte County $9,050 $0
31 City Manager Colfax 1,988 Placer County $85,606 $16,626 32 City Manager San Juan Bautista 2,032 San Benito County $145,988 $10,685 33 City Manager Belvedere 2,043 Marin County $223,597 $56,587 34 City Manager Westmorland 2,050 Imperial County $1,740 $0 35 Interim City Manager Portola 2,075 Plumas County $129,594 $9,088 36 Town Manager Ross 2,272 Marin County $267,602 $55,107 37 Interim City Manager Sutter Creek 2,553 Amador County $101,007 $0 38 City Manager Sutter Creek 2,553 Amador County $55,754 $27,300 39 City Manager Weed 2,710 Siskiyou County $173,830 $30,869 40 Town Manager Yountville 2,781 Napa County $183,515 $41,373 41 Town Manager Yountville 2,781 Napa County $123,577 $56,337 42 City Administrator Carmel-By-The-Sea 3,122 Monterey County $261,954 $83,407 43 City Manager Mt. Shasta 3,203 Siskiyou County $148,800 $32,096 44 City Manager Rio Dell 3,241 Humboldt County $147,935 $31,589 45 City Manager Avalon 3,313 Los Angeles County $219,491 $30,946 46 City Manager Nevada City 3,347 Nevada County $200,561 $50,310 47 City Manager Monte Sereno 3,582 Santa Clara County $191,100 $58,803 48 City Administrator Angels 3,587 Calaveras County $145,331 $1,347 49 City Manager San Joaquin 3,616 Fresno County $162,303 $28,604 50 City Administrator Bishop 3,848 Inyo County $165,296 $58,771 51 City Manager Wheatland 3,893 Yuba County $175,555 $6,236 52 City Manager Del Mar 3,919 San Diego County $285,233 $41,748 53 Public Works Director Interim Town Manager Portola Valley 4,249 San Mateo County $233,550 $66,837 54 Town Manager Portola Valley 4,249 San Mateo County $91,172 $21,679 55 Town Manager Portola Valley 4,249 San Mateo County $86,619 $12,749 56 City Manager Brisbane 4,661 San Mateo County $455,277 $75,083 57 City Manager Needles 4,769 San Bernardino County $158,840 $14,261 58 City Manager Indian Wells 4,797 Riverside County $329,474 $95,398 59 City Manager Willits 4,830 Mendocino County $178,133 $24,284 60 City Manager Jackson 4,867 Amador County $149,551 $52,359 61 City Manager Jackson 4,867 Amador County $121,152 $32,369 62 City Manager Big Bear Lake 4,958 San Bernardino County $260,880 $133,648 63 City Manager Buellton 4,970 Santa Barbara County $222,950 $71,100 64 City Manager Lakeport 4,982 Lake County $179,962 $21,917 65 City Administrator Sonora 5,132 Tuolumne County $177,511 $32,729 66 Town Manager Woodside 5,133 San Mateo County $246,814 $53,873 67 City Manager Calistoga 5,142 Napa County $259,508 $43,980 2023 Government Compensation in California from the California State Controller's Office sorted by City Population Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
472 of 932
68 City Manager St. Helena 5,314 Napa County $252,654 $43,858 69 City Manager La Habra Heights 5,488 Los Angeles County $191,613 $31,468 70 City Administrator Williams 5,528 Colusa County $170,504 $25,837 71 City Manager Crescent City 5,564 Del Norte County $148,062 $42,302 72 City Manager Holtville 5,583 Imperial County $123,801 $19,973 73 City Manager Dos Palos 5,633 Merced County $114,925 $27,309 74 City Manager Solvang 5,663 Santa Barbara County $126,792 $9,642 75 City Manager Solvang 5,663 Santa Barbara County $51,087 $0 76 City Manager City Clerk Villa Park 5,705 Orange County $137,041 $17,469 77 City Manager Gustine 5,936 Merced County $113,106 $28,951 78 City Manager Gustine 5,936 Merced County $44,620 $0
79 City Manager Willows 6,321 Glenn County $155,343 $27,706 80 City Manager Calipatria 6,342 Imperial County $84,784 $11,728 81 City Manager Calipatria 6,342 Imperial County $69,644 $10,887 82 City Manager Huron 6,348 Fresno County $5,288 $0
83 Pw Director/City Colusa 6,447 Colusa County $214,575 $38,443 84 Town Manager Loomis 6,601 Placer County $153,262 $22,086 85 Town Manager Loomis 6,601 Placer County $96,228 $24,114 86 City Manager Sausalito 6,856 Marin County $223,851 $39,465 87 City Administrator Gridley 6,935 Butte County $184,155 $17,057 88 City Administrator Gridley 6,935 Butte County $157,123 $38,039 89 City Manager Atherton 6,976 San Mateo County $313,316 $34,337 90 Town Manager Mammoth Lakes 7,110 Mono County $242,220 $64,714 91 City Manager Escalon 7,249 San Joaquin County $162,555 $38,553 92 City Manager City Attorney Sebastopol 7,295 Sonoma County $253,139 $50,097 93 City Manager Cotati 7,303 Sonoma County $288,685 $62,539 94 City Manager Fowler 7,367 Fresno County $202,396 $43,019 95 Town Manager Fairfax 7,371 Marin County $244,604 $50,092 96 City Manager Ojai 7,533 Ventura County $158,639 $22,580 97 Interim City Manager Ojai 7,533 Ventura County $76,456 $22,426 98 Interim City Manager Ojai 7,533 Ventura County $64,902 $0 99 City Manager Winters 7,587 Yolo County $198,496 $33,490 100 City Manager Winters 7,587 Yolo County $33,772 $1,772 101 City Manager Winters 7,587 Yolo County $28,575 $0
102 City Manager Hughson 7,711 Stanislaus County $160,105 $29,362 103 City Administrator Woodlake 7,713 Tulare County $173,715 $36,406 104 City Manager Yreka 7,805 Siskiyou County $150,248 $34,876 105 City Manager Pismo Beach 7,846 San Luis Obispo County $246,942 $41,291 106 City Manager Pismo Beach 7,846 San Luis Obispo County $201,089 $34,915 107 City Manager Westlake Village 7,902 Los Angeles County $307,602 $95,829 108 City Manager Corning 8,076 Tehama County $65,315 $17,936 109 City Manager Corning 8,076 Tehama County $36,825 $0 110 City Manager Corning 8,076 Tehama County $32,209 $3,184 111 City Manager Firebaugh 8,415 Fresno County $175,659 $63,035 112 City Manager Gonzales 8,466 Monterey County $184,699 $51,358 113 City Manager Gonzales 8,466 Monterey County $74,313 $25,257 114 City Manager Los Altos Hills 8,476 Santa Clara County $254,489 $30,406 115 City Manager Rolling Hills Estates 8,534 Los Angeles County $223,207 $46,297 116 City Administrator Guadalupe 8,676 Santa Barbara County $156,841 $27,049 117 City Manager Cloverdale 8,710 Sonoma County $208,993 $53,765 118 Town Manager Tiburon 8,809 Marin County $262,696 $65,006 119 City Manager Ione 8,856 Amador County $166,241 $0
120 City Manager Ione 8,856 Amador County $118,154 $24,074 121 City Manager Waterford 9,110 Stanislaus County $200,241 $63,135 122 City Manager Capitola 9,497 Santa Cruz County $250,943 $79,202 123 City Manager Live Oak 9,668 Sutter County $183,174 $41,648 124 Town Manager Corte Madera 9,882 Marin County $251,925 $45,008 125 City Manager Rio Vista 10,004 Solano County $119,993 $22,741 126 City Manager Rio Vista 10,004 Solano County $97,782 $25,480 127 City Manager Shasta Lake 10,131 Shasta County $205,813 $59,628 128 City Administrator Exeter 10,179 Tulare County $168,856 $38,324 129 City Manager Morro Bay 10,261 San Luis Obispo County $87,957 $9,962 130 City Manager Morro Bay 10,261 San Luis Obispo County $86,858 $21,777 131 Interim City Manager Morro Bay 10,261 San Luis Obispo County $82,819 $0 132 City Manager Farmersville 10,327 Tulare County $176,607 $38,722 133 City Manager Sonoma 10,532 Sonoma County $146,873 $25,949 134 City Manager Sonoma 10,532 Sonoma County $72,030 $0 135 City Manager Sonoma 10,532 Sonoma County $57,253 $1,638 136 City Manager Placerville 10,540 El Dorado County $176,304 $57,081 137 City Manager Malibu 10,621 Los Angeles County $257,470 $54,955 Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
473 of 932
138 City Manager Clayton 10,683 Contra Costa County $141,666 $33,547 139 Interim City Manager Clayton 10,683 Contra Costa County $86,831 $0 140 City Manager Clayton 10,683 Contra Costa County $43,001 $2,759 141 Town Manager Paradise 10,691 Butte County $84,278 $16,175 142 Town Manager Paradise 10,691 Butte County $73,420 $25,196 143 City Administrator Piedmont 10,782 Alameda County $206,519 $41,987 144 City Administrator Piedmont 10,782 Alameda County $100,580 $10,005 145 City Manager Canyon Lake 10,832 Riverside County $174,167 $46,748 146 City Manager Canyon Lake 10,832 Riverside County $70,524 $7,572 147 City Manager Calimesa 10,867 Riverside County $227,685 $49,100 148 City Manager Sierra Madre 10,909 Los Angeles County $225,801 $49,406 149 City Manager Anderson 10,943 Shasta County $232,464 $29,808 150 City Manager Healdsburg 10,985 Sonoma County $303,994 $38,598 151 City Manager Tehachapi 11,092 Kern County $270,181 $60,630 152 City Manager Hillsborough 11,116 San Mateo County $324,496 $28,559 153 City Manager Hillsborough 11,116 San Mateo County $270,033 $79,421 154 City Manager Half Moon Bay 11,238 San Mateo County $311,894 $49,403 155 City Manager Signal Hill 11,448 Los Angeles County $252,081 $52,865 156 City Administrator Susanville 11,639 Lassen County $184,847 $59,157 157 City Manager Scotts Valley 11,816 Santa Cruz County $258,813 $43,071 158 City Manager Los Alamitos 11,947 Orange County $267,517 $32,446 159 City Manager Newman 12,121 Stanislaus County $213,862 $59,691 160 City Manager Commerce 12,124 Los Angeles County $639,326 $72,191 161 Acting City Manager Commerce 12,124 Los Angeles County $300,262 $74,605 162 City Manager Fortuna 12,181 Humboldt County $159,980 $28,606 163 City Manager San Marino 12,379 Los Angeles County $105,619 $29,043 164 Town Manager San Anselmo 12,426 Marin County $249,729 $57,696 165 City Manager Grover Beach 12,481 San Luis Obispo County $236,247 $54,194 166 City Manager Mendota 12,531 Fresno County $204,172 $12,380 167 City Manager Lindsay 12,594 Tulare County $168,007 $39,653 168 City Manager Larkspur 12,655 Marin County $266,968 $87,980 169 City Manager Carpinteria 12,744 Santa Barbara County $261,271 $60,814 170 City Manager Marysville 12,752 Yuba County $191,807 $32,740 171 City Manager Grand Terrace 12,771 San Bernardino County $244,579 $39,030 172 City Manager Solana Beach 12,887 San Diego County $290,943 $63,077 173 City Manager Palos Verdes Estates 12,974 Los Angeles County $130,486 $26,042 174 Interim City Manager Palos Verdes Estates 12,974 Los Angeles County $64,214 $0 175 City Manager Palos Verdes Estates 12,974 Los Angeles County $48,652 $12,656 176 City Manager Kingsburg 13,042 Fresno County $209,917 $38,378 177 Interim City Manager California City 13,079 Kern County $35,308 $0 178 City Manager California City 13,079 Kern County $28,891 $1,672 179 City Manager Auburn 13,218 Placer County $203,647 $34,992 180 City Manager Auburn 13,218 Placer County $120,783 $16,398 181 Interim City Manager Auburn 13,218 Placer County $78,358 $0 182 City Manager/Executive Emeryville 13,314 Alameda County $272,500 $22,005 183 City Manager Grass Valley 13,400 Nevada County $251,401 $67,134 184 City Manager Hawaiian Gardens 13,560 Los Angeles County $235,057 $64,295 185 City Manager Mill Valley 13,635 Marin County $264,474 $68,328 186 City Manager McFarland 13,965 Kern County $184,539 $17,814 187 City Manager King City 14,216 Monterey County $211,048 $59,284 188 Interim City Manager Livingston 14,286 Merced County $166,449 $30,553 189 City Manager Livingston 14,286 Merced County $161,307 $16,546 190 City Manager Red Bluff 14,300 Tehama County $179,218 $48,950 191 City Manager Parlier 14,368 Fresno County $152,120 $30,173 192 City Manager Pacific Grove 14,966 Monterey County $373,487 $19,901 193 Interim City Manager Pacific Grove 14,966 Monterey County $23,158 $0 194 City Manager La Palma 15,071 Orange County $266,740 $29,494 195 City Administrator/City Ripon 15,741 San Joaquin County $229,823 $65,052 196 City Manager Artesia 16,019 Los Angeles County $231,131 $33,396 197 1000 City Manager Ukiah 16,108 Mendocino County $281,755 $63,807 198 City Manager Clearlake 16,553 Lake County $209,804 $46,420 199 Town Manager Truckee 16,778 Nevada County $228,192 $85,155 200 Town Manager Moraga 16,784 Contra Costa County $264,347 $0 201 Town Manager Moraga 16,784 Contra Costa County $251,498 $56,712 202 City Manager El Segundo 16,964 Los Angeles County $326,041 $54,795 203 City Manager Rancho Mirage 16,992 Riverside County $341,771 $63,913 204 City Manager Fillmore 17,061 Ventura County $252,785 $33,703 205 City Manager Human Resources Coalinga 17,107 Fresno County $190,480 $56,895 206 City Manager Laguna Woods 17,148 Orange County $207,257 $32,458 207 City Manager Kerman 17,256 Fresno County $181,542 $31,873 Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
474 of 932
208 City Clerk City Manager Blythe 17,378 Riverside County $171,283 $58,051 209 City Manager Interim Arroyo Grande 17,941 San Luis Obispo County $231,875 $47,214 210 City Manager Arroyo Grande 17,941 San Luis Obispo County $180,240 $26,940 211 City Administrator Oroville 18,129 Butte County $184,017 $30,773 212 Interim City Oroville 18,129 Butte County $1,013 $0 213 City Manager Pinole 18,192 Contra Costa County $403,027 $33,428 214 Police Chief City Manager Pinole 18,192 Contra Costa County $295,304 $45,222 215 City Manager Arcata 18,540 Humboldt County $211,616 $50,859 216 City Manager Santa Fe Springs 18,640 Los Angeles County $127,890 $1,365 217 Interim City Manager Santa Fe Springs 18,640 Los Angeles County $120,290 $0 218 City Manager Santa Fe Springs 18,640 Los Angeles County $118,993 $23,828 219 City Administrator Chowchilla 18,930 Madera County $219,993 $13,532 220 City Manager Hermosa Beach 19,088 Los Angeles County $301,535 $37,097 221 City Manager Orinda 19,191 Contra Costa County $263,795 $64,672 222 City Manager Dixon 19,403 Solano County $295,562 $175,017 223 City Manager South El Monte 19,441 Los Angeles County $206,961 $24,844 224 City Manager Finance Director Arvin 19,651 Kern County $214,519 $64,000 225 City Manager Agoura Hills 19,841 Los Angeles County $312,141 $84,665 226 City Manager La Canada Flintridge 20,048 Los Angeles County $188,186 $21,291 227 City Manager La Canada Flintridge 20,048 Los Angeles County $125,610 $16,404 228 City Manager Lomita 20,320 Los Angeles County $246,349 $72,395 229 City Manager Albany 20,325 Alameda County $314,403 $65,992 230 City Manager Greenfield 20,561 Monterey County $285,051 $36,980 231 City Manager South Lake Tahoe 20,790 El Dorado County $220,736 $66,658 232 City Manager Port Hueneme 20,916 Ventura County $299,433 $4,229 233 City Manager Port Hueneme 20,916 Ventura County $241,874 $36,502 234 City Manager Coronado 21,589 San Diego County $276,930 $65,470 235 Town Manager Yucca Valley 21,594 San Bernardino County $257,334 $63,110 236 City Manager Corcoran 21,633 Kings County $193,998 $50,859 237 City Manager American Canyon 21,758 Napa County $273,159 $56,056 238 City Manager Imperial 22,141 Imperial County $209,078 $15,014 239 City Manager Cudahy 22,210 Los Angeles County $224,560 $25,679 240 1100 City Manager Shafter 22,226 Kern County $242,205 $20,311 241 City Manager Laguna Beach 22,449 Orange County $514,080 $37,681 242 Interim City Manager Laguna Beach 22,449 Orange County $71,000 $0 243 City Manager Marina 22,695 Monterey County $282,164 $32,078 244 City Manager Calabasas 22,742 Los Angeles County $276,092 $71,153 245 City Manager Oakdale 23,008 Stanislaus County $250,117 $62,947 246 City Manager Millbrae 23,093 San Mateo County $295,466 $42,925 247 City Manager San Fernando 23,643 Los Angeles County $257,925 $69,511 248 City Manager Duarte 23,656 Los Angeles County $222,137 $53,233 249 City Manager Duarte 23,656 Los Angeles County $118,707 $18,787 250 Management Aide - City Duarte 23,656 Los Angeles County $66,521 $14,821 251 City Manager Seal Beach 24,350 Orange County $332,093 $71,085 252 City Manager Selma 24,371 Fresno County $228,749 $38,645 253 City Manager Maywood 24,451 Los Angeles County $196,677 $70,124 254 City Manager Barstow 24,669 San Bernardino County $264,327 $22,664 255 City Manager Patterson 24,790 Stanislaus County $254,410 $51,640 256 City Manager Lafayette 24,808 Contra Costa County $295,400 $83,713 257 City Manager Public Works Loma Linda 24,965 San Bernardino County $291,226 $48,255 258 City Manager Riverbank 25,006 Stanislaus County $199,099 $60,220 259 City Manager Norco 25,068 Riverside County $243,512 $145,664 260 City Manager Twentynine Palms 25,346 San Bernardino County $217,891 $36,044 261 Interim City Manager Twentynine Palms 25,346 San Bernardino County $29,929 $0 262 Town Manager Windsor 25,394 Sonoma County $220,880 $57,870 263 Retired Town Manager Windsor 25,394 Sonoma County $21,374 $2,783 264 City Manager Dinuba 25,573 Tulare County $195,857 $51,226 265 City Manager Reedley 25,653 Fresno County $240,657 $57,585 266 City Manager El Cerrito 25,700 Contra Costa County $241,080 $40,382 267 City Manager Galt 25,785 Sacramento County $213,517 $25,050 268 City Manager Hercules 26,063 Contra Costa County $271,116 $43,013 269 City Manager Eureka 26,073 Humboldt County $196,791 $43,483 270 City Manager Imperial Beach 26,096 San Diego County $259,959 $56,291 271 City Manager Imperial Beach 26,096 San Diego County $125,353 $12,652 272 City Manager South Pasadena 26,270 Los Angeles County $253,393 $51,693 273 City Manager Sanger 26,357 Fresno County $151,916 $33,771 274 City Manager Lemoore 26,855 Kings County $180,805 $50,865 275 City Manager Belmont 26,931 San Mateo County $356,512 $67,761 276 City Manager Soledad 26,966 Monterey County $145,401 $16,499 277 Interim City Manager Soledad 26,966 Monterey County $63,652 $0 Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
475 of 932
278 City Manager Soledad 26,966 Monterey County $49,057 $332 279 City Manager Wasco 27,028 Kern County $216,685 $46,516 280 City Manager Monterey 27,106 Monterey County $267,391 $56,969 281 City Manager Lemon Grove 27,568 San Diego County $192,958 $28,822 282 City Manager Walnut 27,867 Los Angeles County $252,471 $53,506 283 City Manager Ridgecrest 27,940 Kern County $240,370 $32,086 284 City Manager Brawley 28,345 Imperial County $167,028 $43,840 285 City Manager Suisun City 28,840 Solano County $523,926 $51,942 286 City Manager East Palo Alto 29,078 San Mateo County $211,485 $36,482 287 City Manager San Carlos 29,420 San Mateo County $424,881 $90,507 288 City Manager Seaside 30,197 Monterey County $254,693 $53,680 289 City Manager Atascadero 30,279 San Luis Obispo County $309,403 $46,771 290 City Manager Atascadero 30,279 San Luis Obispo County $116,512 $47,534 291 City Manager Laguna Hills 30,315 Orange County $287,581 $88,151 292 City Manager Burlingame 30,513 San Mateo County $277,585 $49,570 293 City Manager Saratoga 30,819 Santa Clara County $306,944 $80,220 294 City Manager Lawndale 30,855 Los Angeles County $211,094 $33,903 295 City Manager El Paso De Robles 30,907 San Luis Obispo County $240,992 $42,699 296 City Manager San Pablo 31,088 Contra Costa County $295,932 $73,958 297 City Manager Banning 31,213 Riverside County $241,146 $33,996 298 City Manager Los Altos 31,255 Santa Clara County $319,118 $38,948 299 City Manager Santa Paula 31,355 Ventura County $239,129 $35,448 300 City Manager Atwater 31,397 Merced County $223,798 $45,061 301 City Manager La Verne 31,697 Los Angeles County $235,402 $29,621 302 Interim City Manager La Verne 31,697 Los Angeles County $543 $0 303 City Manager Beverly Hills 31,806 Los Angeles County $477,790 $152,338 304 City Manager Beverly Hills 31,806 Los Angeles County $342,919 $5,529 305 City Manager Goleta 32,515 Santa Barbara County $312,440 $50,794 306 City Manager Foster City 32,581 San Mateo County $361,982 $62,097 307 City Manager Dana Point 32,596 Orange County $295,539 $62,930 308 City Manager Desert Hot Springs 32,654 Riverside County $189,970 $34,953 309 City Manager Desert Hot Springs 32,654 Riverside County $28,581 $3,739 310 City Manager Menlo Park 33,140 San Mateo County $300,377 $48,694 311 Town Manager Los Gatos 33,230 Santa Clara County $275,349 $42,803 312 City Manager Bell 33,301 Los Angeles County $225,021 $66,713 313 City Manager Pleasant Hill 33,352 Contra Costa County $328,628 $27,134 314 City Manager Pleasant Hill 33,352 Contra Costa County $248,454 $58,319 315 City Manager San Dimas 33,920 Los Angeles County $272,204 $50,157 316 City Manager Manhattan Beach 34,195 Los Angeles County $305,724 $46,856 317 City Manager San Juan Capistrano 34,992 Orange County $312,318 $68,827 318 City Manager West Hollywood 35,075 Los Angeles County $371,970 $82,767 319 City Manager Moorpark 35,114 Ventura County $268,161 $90,237 320 City Manager Temple City 35,975 Los Angeles County $216,478 $44,127 321 City Manager Adelanto 36,131 San Bernardino County $251,120 $24,854 322 City Manager Wildomar 36,327 Riverside County $289,525 $67,680 323 2011 City Manager Martinez 36,439 Contra Costa County $267,540 $80,422 324 2011 City Manager Martinez 36,439 Contra Costa County $224,608 $15,370 325 City Manager Lathrop 37,033 San Joaquin County $324,075 $61,358 326 City Manager Pacifica 37,062 San Mateo County $273,252 $79,062 327 City Manager Montclair 37,211 San Bernardino County $335,557 $98,305 328 City Manager La Puente 37,459 Los Angeles County $255,126 $34,074 329 City Manager Claremont 37,686 Los Angeles County $287,623 $42,656 330 City Manager Monrovia 38,087 Los Angeles County $260,145 $42,751 331 City Manager La Quinta 38,370 Riverside County $262,326 $63,494 332 City Manager Bell Gardens 38,381 Los Angeles County $281,527 $65,996 333 City Manager San Gabriel 38,613 Los Angeles County $253,058 $42,968 334 City Manager Calexico 39,262 Imperial County $178,802 $36,329 335 City Manager Culver City 40,213 Los Angeles County $380,560 $51,656 336 City Manager Stanton 40,297 Orange County $260,133 $42,248 337 City Manager Rancho Palos Verdes 40,919 Los Angeles County $276,506 $55,452 338 City Manager San Bruno 42,152 San Mateo County $223,079 $41,664 339 City Manager San Bruno 42,152 San Mateo County $129,836 $22,884 340 Town Manager Danville 42,567 Contra Costa County $301,939 $124,631 341 City Manager Hollister 42,872 San Benito County $306,275 $15,977 342 City Manager Hollister 42,872 San Benito County $246,009 $57,456 343 City Manager Campbell 43,095 Santa Clara County $350,231 $81,216 344 City Manager Coachella 43,173 Riverside County $255,038 $34,264 345 135 City Manager Lompoc 43,610 Santa Barbara County $249,926 $24,239 346 City Manager Palm Springs 43,791 Riverside County $297,125 $107,305 347 1100 City Manager Rohnert Park 43,821 Sonoma County $308,881 $62,185 Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
476 of 932
348 1100 City Manager Rohnert Park 43,821 Sonoma County $170,025 $9,768 349 City Manager El Centro 44,952 Imperial County $217,404 $28,140 350 City Manager Oakley 45,736 Contra Costa County $272,752 $89,101 351 City Manager Rancho Santa Margarita 46,305 Orange County $308,433 $27,499 352 City Manager Morgan Hill 46,384 Santa Clara County $363,837 $68,318 353 City Manager Newark 46,635 Alameda County $319,655 $191,683 354 City Manager Los Banos 47,419 Merced County $5,247 $0 355 City Manager Brea 47,725 Orange County $336,131 $61,660 356 City Manager Cerritos 47,806 Los Angeles County $232,396 $69,814 357 City Manager Cerritos 47,806 Los Angeles County $203,094 $66,615 358 City Manager La Mirada 48,077 Los Angeles County $260,532 $81,211 359 City Manager San Luis Obispo 48,684 San Luis Obispo County $297,251 $38,608 360 City Manager Poway 49,273 San Diego County $317,539 $81,386 361 City Manager Ceres 49,319 Stanislaus County $200,389 $20,779 362 City Manager Ceres 49,319 Stanislaus County $117,101 $1,842 363 City Manager Cypress 49,345 Orange County $332,669 $61,865 364 City Manager Azusa 49,420 Los Angeles County $321,054 $77,450 365 City Manager Aliso Viejo 50,068 Orange County $365,288 $84,962 366 City Manager/Exec Dir Covina 50,485 Los Angeles County $287,635 $28,115 367 City Manager Rosemead 50,541 Los Angeles County $259,421 $8,918 368 City Manager Palm Desert 50,889 Riverside County $320,346 $81,848 369 City Manager Cathedral City 50,911 Riverside County $255,678 $61,068 370 City Manager Watsonville 51,032 Santa Cruz County $244,104 $45,160 371 City Manager Novato 51,140 Marin County $300,619 $51,671 372 Interim City Manager Novato 51,140 Marin County $214,516 $40,340 373 City Manager Glendora 51,209 Los Angeles County $322,781 $60,889 374 City Manager Paramount 52,153 Los Angeles County $276,496 $87,444 375 City Administrator Placentia 52,226 Orange County $396,799 $74,182 376 City Manager Delano 52,484 Kern County $338,356 $105,875 377 City Manager Colton 52,778 San Bernardino County $262,475 $32,869 378 City Manager Huntington Park 53,219 Los Angeles County $220,903 $57,278 379 City Manager Lincoln 53,231 Placer County $254,866 $38,958 380 City Manager Diamond Bar 53,335 Los Angeles County $293,698 $67,898 381 City Manager San Jacinto 53,538 Riverside County $275,118 $63,490 382 City Manager Yucaipa 53,810 San Bernardino County $311,043 $6,402 383 City Manager Yucaipa 53,810 San Bernardino County $209,287 $55,739 384 City Manager West Sacramento 54,278 Yolo County $282,047 $69,391 385 City Manager Highland 55,676 San Bernardino County $273,760 $68,205 386 City Manager Arcadia 55,783 Los Angeles County $331,826 $70,986 387 City Manager Fountain Valley 56,333 Orange County $267,622 $50,201 388 City Manager Beaumont 57,416 Riverside County $261,940 $60,122 389 City Manager Petaluma 58,445 Sonoma County $247,693 $41,756 390 City Manager National City 58,555 San Diego County $334,953 $20,167 391 City Manager National City 58,555 San Diego County $178,568 $19,253 392 City Manager National City 58,555 San Diego County $171,267 $27,808 393 City Manager Santee 59,195 San Diego County $268,932 $55,193 394 City Manager Hanford 59,286 Kings County $237,085 $31,471 395 City Manager Monterey Park 59,347 Los Angeles County $242,985 $25,696 396 City Manager Cupertino 59,471 Santa Clara County $323,954 $58,790 397 City Manager San Rafael 59,585 Marin County $294,590 $181,965 398 City Manager San Rafael 59,585 Marin County $217,817 $114,074 399 City Manager Gardena 60,028 Los Angeles County $320,336 $80,243 400 City Manager La Mesa 60,620 San Diego County $284,100 $71,862 401 City Manager Woodland 60,672 Yolo County $315,828 $57,818 402 City Manager Pico Rivera 60,820 Los Angeles County $373,252 $34,684 403 City Manager La Habra 60,901 Orange County $285,706 $72,416 404 City Manager Encinitas 61,028 San Diego County $294,517 $82,381 405 2001 City Administrator Gilroy 61,033 Santa Clara County $321,145 $57,501 406 City Manager Montebello 61,930 Los Angeles County $403,850 $57,430 407 City Manager Montebello 61,930 Los Angeles County $16,522 $2,035 408 City Manager San Clemente 62,297 Orange County $276,384 $41,177 409 Interim City Manager San Clemente 62,297 Orange County $28,211 $0 410 City Manager Santa Cruz 62,776 Santa Cruz County $300,314 $43,595 411 City Manager Porterville 62,934 Tulare County $191,671 $25,217 412 City Manager Porterville 62,934 Tulare County $166,591 $21,782 413 City Manager Laguna Niguel 64,291 Orange County $311,706 $37,111 414 Interim City Manager South San Francisco 64,601 San Mateo County $380,057 $31,211 415 City Manager South San Francisco 64,601 San Mateo County $20,888 $1,263 416 City Manager Brentwood 64,811 Contra Costa County $319,769 $61,066 417 City Manager Davis 65,054 Yolo County $325,008 $58,923 Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
477 of 932
418 City Manager Yorba Linda 66,087 Orange County $310,576 $78,904 419 City Manager Lynwood 66,271 Los Angeles County $324,232 $168,704 420 City Manager Union City 66,432 Alameda County $333,728 $69,069 421 City Manager Lodi 66,492 San Joaquin County $270,204 $37,116 422 City Manager Madera 66,560 Madera County $204,946 $32,717 423 City Manager Palo Alto 67,973 Santa Clara County $413,330 $205,471 424 City Manager Redondo Beach 68,239 Los Angeles County $312,346 $74,432 425 City Manager Eastvale 68,884 Riverside County $265,707 $42,566 426 City Manager Camarillo 69,014 Ventura County $324,593 $94,757 427 City Manager Walnut Creek 69,433 Contra Costa County $311,738 $63,679 428 City Manager Yuba City 70,256 Sutter County $234,981 $50,899 429 City Manager Tulare 70,799 Tulare County $232,522 $14,067 430 City Manager Turlock 71,273 Stanislaus County $243,880 $29,652 431 City Manager Lake Elsinore 71,452 Riverside County $366,588 $57,205 432 City Manager Rocklin 71,609 Placer County $254,919 $92,666 433 City Manager Redlands 72,696 San Bernardino County $294,942 $88,420 434 City Manager Dublin 72,917 Alameda County $379,190 $64,369 435 Town Manager Apple Valley 74,322 San Bernardino County $318,391 $44,484 436 City Manager Pittsburg 75,085 Contra Costa County $305,233 $36,230 437 City Manager Pleasanton 75,960 Alameda County $322,975 $48,589 438 City Manager Chino Hills 76,414 San Bernardino County $374,337 $118,170 439 City Manager Bellflower 76,990 Los Angeles County $290,543 $78,482 440 Cm04 City Manager Napa 77,174 Napa County $307,661 $51,179 441 City Manager Alameda 78,071 Alameda County $299,842 $30,826 442 City Manager Upland 78,285 San Bernardino County $279,447 $67,538 443 City Manager Tustin 78,844 Orange County $340,087 $61,499 444 City Manager Perris 79,311 Riverside County $348,503 $71,348 445 City Manager Lakewood 80,162 Los Angeles County $322,829 $54,625 446 City Manager Milpitas 81,773 Santa Clara County $300,641 $49,109 447 City Manager Milpitas 81,773 Santa Clara County $254,959 $33,904 448 City Manager Alhambra 81,811 Los Angeles County $297,180 $51,121 449 A100 City Manager Redwood City 81,863 San Mateo County $390,980 $122,254 450 City Manager (New) Rancho Cordova 82,109 Sacramento County $279,958 $48,454 451 City Manager (Old) Rancho Cordova 82,109 Sacramento County $84,629 $921 452 City Manager Newport Beach 82,419 Orange County $334,758 $89,159 453 City Manager San Ramon 82,525 Contra Costa County $267,242 $67,398 454 City Manager San Ramon 82,525 Contra Costa County $144,349 $4,114 455 City Manager Buena Park 82,689 Orange County $290,301 $81,528 456 City Manager Livermore 84,828 Alameda County $327,434 $127,352 457 City Manager Citrus Heights 85,554 Sacramento County $274,315 $57,212 458 City Manager Hawthorne 85,566 Los Angeles County $258,959 $72,345 459 City Administrator Santa Barbara 85,679 Santa Barbara County $329,106 $58,423 460 City Manager Mountain View 86,535 Santa Clara County $388,690 $86,848 461 City Manager Lake Forest 86,917 Orange County $310,806 $54,572 462 City Manager San Leandro 87,098 Alameda County $339,313 $191,612 463 City Manager Whittier 87,527 Los Angeles County $289,476 $35,759 464 City Manager Folsom 88,023 Sacramento County $303,068 $155,930 465 City Manager Westminster 89,490 Orange County $279,514 $39,110 466 City Manager Hemet 89,663 Riverside County $239,844 $123,185 467 City Manager Indio 90,680 Riverside County $280,979 $75,323 468 City Manager Manteca 90,917 San Joaquin County $286,440 $22,153 469 City Manager Mission Viejo 91,304 Orange County $316,451 $49,012 470 City Manager Merced 91,837 Merced County $274,166 $39,475 471 City Manager Merced 91,837 Merced County $201,144 $17,810 472 City Manager Carson 91,924 Los Angeles County $394,925 $66,780 473 City Manager Redding 92,446 Shasta County $305,025 $54,103 474 City Manager Chino 92,585 San Bernardino County $319,930 $71,309 475 City Manager South Gate 92,729 Los Angeles County $337,738 $74,881 476 City Manager South Gate 92,729 Los Angeles County $16,499 $1,433 477 0025 City Manager Santa Monica 92,912 Los Angeles County $377,589 $61,692 478 City Manager Compton 93,671 Los Angeles County $264,639 $26,920 479 City Manager Compton 93,671 Los Angeles County $112,260 $164 480 City Manager San Marcos 95,998 San Diego County $283,146 $50,480 481 City Manager San Marcos 95,998 San Diego County $237,357 $53,155 482 City Manager Tracy 96,609 San Joaquin County $169,052 $28,839 483 City Manager Vista 99,723 San Diego County $457,312 $19,885 484 City Manager Vista 99,723 San Diego County $284,389 $88,380 485 City Manager Hesperia 100,087 San Bernardino County $392,301 $43,391 486 City Manager Hesperia 100,087 San Bernardino County $232,351 $88,089 487 City Manager Norwalk 101,172 Los Angeles County $364,200 $185,020 Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
478 of 932
488 City Manager Daly City 101,458 San Mateo County $434,537 $79,272 489 City Manager Vacaville 102,173 Solano County $329,244 $33,008 490 City Manager Rialto 103,097 San Bernardino County $555,092 $6,706 491 City Manager San Mateo 103,352 San Mateo County $255,399 $25,189 492 City Manager San Mateo 103,352 San Mateo County $118,558 $22,839 493 City Manager El Cajon 104,180 San Diego County $334,052 $54,782 494 City Manager Jurupa Valley 104,721 Riverside County $242,732 $16,146 495 City Manager Burbank 105,603 Los Angeles County $348,895 $37,149 496 City Manager Inglewood 106,065 Los Angeles County $503,737 $117,537 497 City Manager Inglewood 106,065 Los Angeles County $47,647 $0 498 City Manager El Monte 106,786 Los Angeles County $320,465 $61,401 499 City Manager San Buenaventura 107,569 Ventura County $105,143 $32,477 500 City Manager Temecula 108,700 Riverside County $344,195 $190,748 501 City Manager West Covina 109,105 Los Angeles County $122,780 $12,490 502 City Manager Murrieta 109,177 Riverside County $351,930 $81,784 503 City Manager Costa Mesa 109,423 Orange County $382,675 $77,753 504 City Manager Chico 109,589 Butte County $213,079 $46,283 505 City Manager Santa Maria 110,608 Santa Barbara County $334,830 $60,828 506 City Manager Downey 111,493 Los Angeles County $226,927 $43,097 507 City Manager/Retiree Downey 111,493 Los Angeles County $193,390 $0 508 City Manager (Tra) Downey 111,493 Los Angeles County $34,274 $0 509 City Manager Menifee 111,560 Riverside County $358,297 $90,906 510 City Manager Richmond 112,735 Contra Costa County $356,156 $105,504 511 City Manager Carlsbad 114,319 San Diego County $380,742 $90,778 512 City Manager Antioch 115,632 Contra Costa County $169,946 $26,252 513 City Manager Fairfield 120,339 Solano County $311,981 $77,607 514 City Manager Concord 121,513 Contra Costa County $326,696 $87,239 515 City Manager Vallejo 121,558 Solano County $294,180 $48,336 516 City Manager Thousand Oaks 122,643 Ventura County $335,932 $100,902 517 City Manager Simi Valley 124,029 Ventura County $313,840 $60,633 518 1040 City Mgr. Berkeley 125,327 Alameda County $372,483 $139,440 519 City Manager Clovis 126,133 Fresno County $279,599 $80,607 520 City Manager Santa Clara 132,048 Santa Clara County $268,745 $34,762 521 City Manager Santa Clara 132,048 Santa Clara County $131,347 $23,208 522 City Manager Victorville 138,202 San Bernardino County $330,630 $60,891 523 City Manager Orange 138,621 Orange County $306,635 $47,990 524 City Manager Pasadena 139,692 Los Angeles County $429,131 $58,503 525 City Manager Fullerton 140,311 Orange County $257,150 $48,250 526 City Manager Torrance 142,910 Los Angeles County $375,994 $30,587 527 City Manager Visalia 144,532 Tulare County $249,140 $32,626 528 City Manager Escondido 150,002 San Diego County $322,072 $57,622 529 City Manager Pomona 152,166 Los Angeles County $584,525 $50,392 530 Interm City Manager Pomona 152,166 Los Angeles County $246,095 $21,516 531 City Manager Roseville 154,329 Placer County $344,911 $76,191 532 City Manager Corona 156,615 Riverside County $355,232 $64,283 533 City Manager Sunnyvale 157,566 Santa Clara County $429,201 $137,090 534 City Manager Hayward 159,770 Alameda County $381,431 $40,721 535 City Manager Salinas 162,037 Monterey County $498,594 $49,393 536 City Manager Palmdale 166,055 Los Angeles County $309,942 $76,587 537 City Manager Garden Grove 171,024 Orange County $307,566 $150,187 538 City Manager Garden Grove 171,024 Orange County $87,850 $28,973 539 City Manager Oceanside 171,483 San Diego County $311,138 $48,340 540 City Manager Oceanside 171,483 San Diego County $144,723 $10,902 541 City Manager Lancaster 172,631 Los Angeles County $362,738 $114,361 542 City Manager Rancho Cucamonga 173,316 San Bernardino County $369,268 $244,274 543 City Manager Santa Rosa 174,890 Sonoma County $304,414 $44,972 544 City Manager Elk Grove 178,679 Sacramento County $337,039 $80,578 545 City Manager Ontario Housing Ontario 181,224 San Bernardino County $397,440 $87,700 546 City Manager Glendale 191,586 Los Angeles County $329,057 $152,009 547 City Manager Huntington Beach 192,503 Orange County $506,983 $49,388 548 Interim City Huntington Beach 192,503 Orange County $317,697 $37,132 549 City Manager Oxnard 197,536 Ventura County $362,301 $59,704 550 City Manager Moreno Valley 207,146 Riverside County $375,515 $66,412 551 City Manager Fontana 214,223 San Bernardino County $369,562 $99,216 552 City Manager Modesto 217,862 Stanislaus County $312,947 $66,835 553 City Manager (U) San Bernardino 226,541 San Bernardino County $212,891 $2,815 554 City Manager (U) San Bernardino 226,541 San Bernardino County $38,754 $5,985 555 City Manager Fremont 229,250 Alameda County $411,911 $95,213 556 City Manager Santa Clarita 230,428 Los Angeles County $356,767 $97,254 557 City Manager Chula Vista 278,247 San Diego County $335,655 $79,600 Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
479 of 932
558 City Manager (Em) Santa Ana 310,797 Orange County $424,518 $81,189 559 City Manager Irvine 314,550 Orange County $411,082 $51,819 560 City Manager Riverside 316,690 Riverside County $355,725 $39,856 561 1101 City Manager Stockton 317,204 San Joaquin County $334,022 $81,321 562 City Manager Anaheim 340,160 Orange County $344,873 $46,112 563 City Manager Bakersfield 411,109 Kern County $240,003 $23,373 564 City Administrator Oakland 425,093 Alameda County $203,384 $91,204 565 City Administrator Oakland 425,093 Alameda County $138,301 $20,276 566 City Administrator Oakland 425,093 Alameda County $110,749 $41,724 567 City Administrator Oakland 425,093 Alameda County $42,180 $24,340 568 City Manager Long Beach 458,813 Los Angeles County $361,973 $140,509 569 Public Affairs Officer - Long Beach 458,813 Los Angeles County $156,555 $65,457 570 City Manager Sacramento 520,407 Sacramento County $593,240 $64,058 571 City Manager Fresno 546,971 Fresno County $281,035 $43,285 572 City Manager U San Jose 969,491 Santa Clara County $425,101 $79,215 573 Dir City Manager's San Jose 969,491 Santa Clara County $309,955 $31,493 574 Dir City Manager's San Jose 969,491 Santa Clara County $276,514 $78,145 575 Dir City Manager's San Jose 969,491 Santa Clara County $270,232 $12,050 576 City Administrative Los Angeles 3,814,318 Los Angeles County $372,980 $50,324 Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
480 of 932
City Council Meeting L. 2.

DATE: 10/01/2024
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
SUBJECT: Consideration of Resolution No. 8636 Establishing an Interfund Loan from the General Fund to the Inclusionary Housing Fund in the amount of $1,500,000 (Management Services/Finance Director Garcia)
MOTION(S):

If the City Council determines that staff’s recommendation is appropriate, the following motion is provided:

I move to adopt Resolution No. 8636 authorizing an interfund loan from the General Fund (101) to the Inclusionary Housing Fund (255) in the amount of $1,500,000 for a term not-to-exceed five (5) years.

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that Council adopt Resolution No. 8636 authorizing an interfund loan from the General Fund (101) to the Inclusionary Housing Fund (255) in the amount of $1,500,000 for a term not-to-exceed five (5) years.

DISCUSSION:

In December 2013, the City Council established an interfund loan policy, Resolution No. 7354. One of the stated purposes for an interfund loan was to offset the timing differences in cash flow.

In 2023, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 2959, creating an Inclusionary Housing Program and adopted Resolution No. 8528, adopting a fee schedule for the Inclusionary Housing In-Lieu fee as an alternative means for developers to meet affordability requirements under the Program. The stated purpose of collecting an in-lieu fee was to fund the provision of affordable housing and to administer the Inclusionary Housing Program.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
481 of 932
As of now, the Inclusionary Housing Fund has not collected revenue from in-lieu fees, but there are two residential development projects currently in the project pipeline that are anticipated to generate significant revenues for the Fund. The Biennial Budget for Fiscal Years 2025 and 2026 includes anticipated revenues of $1.8 million and $1.5 million, respectively, for the Inclusionary Housing Fund as adopted by Council.

The timing of this anticipated in-lieu fee revenue has created a cash flow gap for the Inclusionary Housing Fund as it is now presented with an opportunity to fund 50 affordable housing units through the Venue at Orange Apartments Project (Project). In order to construct the affordable housing units, the developer of the Venue at Orange Apartments has requested $1.5 million in funding assistance.

This assistance would be structured as a forgivable loan from the Inclusionary Housing Fund to the developer of the Venue at Orange Apartments. The loan would have a 55-year duration. For each year of the loan term that follows issuance of a final certificate of occupancy, as long as the Project is compliant with the provisions of the loan agreement and affordability covenants, the principal amount of the loan and accrued interest shall be reduced by one-fifty-fifth (1/55).

Because the Inclusionary Housing Fund is currently without the moneys needed to provide this financial assistance and because the opportunity to fund affordable housing via an existing development project is rare, staff collaborated on the best way to provide bridge funding. If the City were to wait until the Inclusionary Housing Fund had sufficient balance to make this loan, the economic conditions determining the project feasibility could change such that the project cannot go forward with the same affordability structure. It was determined that an interfund loan from the General Fund to the Inclusionary Housing Fund was the most effective means of moving this affordable housing project forward, provided that the terms of the interfund loan abided by the policy and procedures set forth in the City's interfund loan policy.

These facts are the basis for the action recommended herein.

ALTERNATIVES:

Council may choose to reject, modify, or table this request for action.

STRATEGIC PLAN:

N/A
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
482 of 932
SUBMITTED BY:

Danielle Garcia, Management Services/Finance Director
RECOMMENDED BY:

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

Brian Desatnik, Development Services Director
Janice McConnell, Assistant City Manager
Fiscal Impact
Fiscal Year: FY 2025
Appropriation Required Y/N: No
Amount: $1,500,000
Discussion:

Approval of Resolution No. 8636 will create an advance to be recorded during the current fiscal year to the Inclusionary Housing Fund (Fund 255) of $1,500,000 and a corresponding advance receivable in the General Fund (Fund 101). The advance will be repaid to the General Fund as soon as revenue is earned in the Inclusionary Housing Fund from payment of in-lieu fees collected from private developers. The term of the interfund loan is not to exceed 5 years and interest shall be calculated at the end of each year using the average 4-quarter investment earnings from the Local Area Investment Fund (LAIF). No additional appropriation is required because these transactions are balance sheet items (assets & liabilities) rather than expenditures or revenues.

Attachments
Resolution No. 8636 - Interfund Loan General Fund to Inclusionary Housing Fund
Resolution No. 7354 (Reference)
Resolution No. 8528 (Reference)
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
483 of 932
1 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8636 Approving Interfund Loan from General Fund to Inclusionary Housing Fund.docx-ms

RESOLUTION NO. 8636

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDLANDS APPROVING

AN INTERFUND LOAN FROM THE GENERAL FUND TO THE INCLUSIONARY

HOUSING FUND

WHEREAS, the City Council approved Resolution No. 7354 establishing an interfund loan policy effective December 17, 2013; and

WHEREAS, Resolution No. 7354 requires that interfund loans established after the effective date of the policy be approved by the City Council subsequent to review by the City Attorney and preparation of a resolution authorizing the loan, including specific loan terms, if applicable; and

WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 2959 on July 5, 2023, adding Chapter

18.230 for an Inclusionary Housing Program that imposes income and affordability restrictions on new residential development for For-Sale and Rental Housing, including an alternative means of fulfilling inclusionary housing obligations through payment of an in-lieu fee; and

WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 8528 on December 19, 2023, establishing In-Lieu Fee Amounts for compliance with the City’s Inclusionary Housing Program; and

WHEREAS, moneys in the Inclusionary Housing Fund shall be expended exclusively to provide housing affordable to Very Low-income, Low-income, and Moderate-income households in the City of Redlands, and administration and compliance monitoring of the Inclusionary Housing Program; and

WHEREAS, the Venue at Orange Apartments propose s to construct and maintain 50 housing units affordable to Very Low Income households alongside market rate units pursuant to the availability of financial assistance from the Inclusionary Housing Fund that will make provision of these affordable housing units financially feasible; and

WHEREAS, there is a gap in timing of cash flows for the Inclusionary Housing Fund, which depends on the In-Lieu Fees yet to be paid from existing residential developments that have yet to apply for building permits but which are expected to generate significant In -Lieu Fee revenue over the next two to five years; and

WHEREAS, the City-contracted consultant, Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. has prepared a financial gap analysis for the Venue at Orange Apartment Project and found a $1.59 million financial gap for the provision of the 50 units of affordable housing, consistent with the developer’s request for financial assistance in the amount of $1.5 million in the form of a forgivable loan from the Inclusionary Housing Fund; and

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
484 of 932
2 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8636 Approving Interfund Loan from General Fund to Inclusionary Housing Fund.docx-ms

WHEREAS, an interfund loan from the General Fund to the Inclusionary Housing Fund would bridge this gap in cash flows and enable the Inclusionary Housing Fund to contribute $1,500,000 in financial assistance requested by the Venue at Orange Apartment project;

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

Section 1. The City Council hereby approves a loan from the General Fund to the Inclusionary Housing Fund for a period not-to-exceed five (5) years in the amount of one million five hundred thousand dollars ($1,500,000) at an annual interest rate equal to the rolling four- quarter average interest rate earned by the Local Area Investment Fund to be charged at the end of the fiscal year on the amount of then-outstanding principal. The loan shall be made by an advance to be recorded to the Inclusionary Housing Fund in the current fiscal year.

Section 2. This Resolution is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act Public Resources Code section 21000 et seq.) (" CEQA") pursuant to the State's CEQA Guidelines sub- section 15060(c)(2) because the adoption of this Resolution will not result in a direct or a reasonably foreseeable, indirect, physical change in the environment, and State CEQA Guidelines sub- sections 15378(b)(2) and (4), because the adoption of this Resolution, does not constitute a " project" under CEQA, and therefore review under CEQA is not required.

ADOPTED, SIGNED AND APPROVED this 1st day of October, 2024.

___________________________________
Eddie Tejeda, Mayor

ATTEST:

________________________________
Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
485 of 932
3 I:\cmo\Resolutions\8636 Approving Interfund Loan from General Fund to Inclusionary Housing Fund.docx-ms

I, Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk of the City of Redlands, hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was adopted by the City Council at a regular meeting thereof held on the 1st day of October, 2024, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAINED:

ABSENT:

____________________________________
Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
486 of 932
RESOLUTION NO. 7354

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDLANDS

ESTABLISHING AN INTERFUND LOAN POLICY
WHEREAS, as part of City staff's continuing effort to enhance the fiscal and operational practices of the City, an Interfund Loan Policy has been developed and submitted to the City Council for review; and
WHEREAS, an interfund loan is defined as a loan from one City fund to another City fund for a specific purpose with a requirement for repayment; and WHEREAS, the purpose for establishing an Interfund Loan Policy is to provide guidelines regarding the establishment, management, and repayment of interfund loans.

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

Section 1. The City Council hereby adopts the Interfund Loan Policy attached hereto as Exhibit "A."
ADOPTED, SIGNED AND APPROVED this 17* day of December, 2013.

Pete Aguilar,%Iayor
ATTEST
a It i Citý Clerk
I, Sam Irwin, City Clerk of the City of Redlands. hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was adopted by the City Council at a regular meeting thereof held on the 17* day ofDecember, 2013, by the following vote:

AYES: Councihnembers Harrison, Foster, Gardner, Gilbreath; Mayor Aguilar NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: None
Sam Ir?in, City ÖlÄrk
I:\celerk\Resolutions\Res 7300-7399\Reso 7354.doc
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
487 of 932
EXHIBIT "A"
City of Redlands

POLICY & PROCEDURES
Subject: Interfund Loan Policy Department: Finance
Policy No. F-003-2013 Effective Date:

Ordinance/Resolution No. 7354 Approval Date:

DEFINITION
Interfund loans are loans from one City fund to another City fund for a specific purpose with a requirement for repayment.

PURPOSE
The purpose of this policy is to provide guidelines regarding the establishment, management, and repayment of interfund loans.

INTERFUND LOAN POLICY
General

1.1 Interfund loans should be considered temporary or short-term borrowing of cash and may be made for the following reasons:
? To offset timing differences in cash flow
? To offset timing differences between expenditures and reimbursements, typically associated with grant funding
? To provide for advance spending for a capital project prior to securing project financing. ? For other needs as deemed appropriate by City Council.

1.2 The term of the interfund loan may continue over a period of more than one year, but must be "temporary" in the sense that no permanent diversion of the lending fund results from the failure to repay by the borrowing fund. Additionally, interfund loans should not hinder the accomplishment of any function or project for which the lending fund was established.

1.3 Interfund loans should not be used to solve ongoing structural budget problems.

Procedures

2.1 The establishment of Interfund loans requires coordination among several parties, including the department overseeing the funds that would provide or receive the loan, the Finance Department, and the City Attorney's Office. Interfund loans must be approved by the City Council.

2.2 The following procedures should be followed in establishing an interfund loan:

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
488 of 932
EXHIBIT "A"
1) The department managing the borrowing fund should prepare a request of interfund loan. The request shall include amount requested, loan period, and monthly/annual payment plan. The department should analyze projected revenues and expenditures for the particular fund. The interfund loan request and supporting documentation should be forwarded to the Finance Department.
2) The Finance Department should provide information on the status of the funds providing and receiving the loan, potential funding options, and estimated loan and interest repayment calculation. Interfund loans should include an interest component that equals the investment earnings the providing fund would have received had the loan not occurred.
3) Documents prepared in 1 and 2 above should be forwarded to the City Attorney's Office to determine if there are legal restrictions associated with the use of the identified funding source for the interfund loan, and to prepare the resolution with the loan terms.

Repayment

3.1 Repayment of the loan is top priority of the borrowing fund once cash is available.

3.2 As part of the annual budget process, the Finance Department should ensure that the loan repayment is budgeted consistent with the loan terms.

3.3 If the borrowing fund continues to maintain negative cash balance for periods beyond the term of the loan, scheduled payments should be postponed until the fund has a positive cash balance. Interest should continue to accrue and be added to the principal of the loan.

3.4 If the borrowing fund is an operating fund, it must maintain positive cash balance of at least 10% of its operating expense/expenditure budget to be able to repay the loan; excess cash balance (over the 10%) should be used to make scheduled payments and catch-up payments.

Modification

4.1 Modification of loan term, interest rate, and/or repayment schedule of an interfund loan should be approved by unanimous vote of the City Council.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
489 of 932
RESOLUTION NO. 8528

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDLANDS

ADOPTING A FEE SCHEDULE FOR THE INCLUSIONARY HOUSING IN - LIEU FEE PURSUANT TO ORDINANCE NO. 2959
WHEREAS, on July 5t11, 2023, the City Councilof the City of RedlandsadoptedOrdinance No. 2959 to add Chapter 18.230 to the RedlandsMunicipal Code relating to Inclusionary Housing; and
WHEREAS, as backup to Ordinance No. 2959, the City Council received a Policy Recommendation report dated January 23, 2023 and a Supplemental In -lieu Fee Analysis Memorandum from Keyser Marston Associates (KMA) which include analysespertaining to the City' smethodologyfor calculatingthepaymentof InclusionaryHousingfees; and WHEREAS, anUpdated In -lieu FeeAnalysis datedOctober28, 2023 waspreparedby KMA anddistributedto the City Council aspart of the agendapacketfor theDecember19, 2023meeting; and
WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 2959 enhancesthe public welfare by requiring certain housing developmentsprovide affordable units or comply with alternativemeansto promote the City' s legislativepolicy of ensuring thedevelopmentof affordablehousing; WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 2959 authorizesan alternative meansof compliance whereby a developermay pay anin -lieu fee if thehousingdevelopmentconsistsof for -saleor rentalunits, and for any fractional unit that is determined whencalculating the total number of inclusionary units required; and
WHEREAS, for arental housingdevelopmentwith greaterthan22units, OrdinanceNo. 2959 requiresCity Councilapprovalof a developer'srequestto payanin -lieu fee, andto approvesucha request theCity Councilmustfind thatprovidingtheaffordable unitsin thedevelopmentwould create an unreasonableeconomic hardship due to such factors as project size, site constraints, and/or excessivelylargeaffordability gaps; and
WHEREAS, theamountof the in -lieu feepursuant toOrdinanceNo. 2959mustbe established by City Councilresolutionin anoticedpublic hearing; and WHEREAS, the notice of the public hearing on December 19, 2023 was published in a newspaperof generalcirculation on December8, 2023.

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

The above recitals are true and correct and are incorporated herein. 1 I:\Resolutions\Res8500-8599\ 8528Adopting a FeeSchedulefor the InclusionaryHousingIn - LieuFee.docx-ms Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
490 of 932
Section 1. The Inclusionary Housing In -lieu Fee shall be assetforth in Attachment A to this resolution.

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

ADOPTED, SIGNEDAND APPROVEDthis 19thdayof December, 2023.

Eddie Tejeda, Mayor
ATTEST:
e Donaldson, City Clerk
2 I:\Resolutions\Res8500-8599\8528Adoptinga FeeSchedulefor the InclusionaryHousingIn -Lieu Fee.docx-ms Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
491 of 932
I, JeanneDonaldson, City Clerk of the City of Redlands, herebycertify that the foregoingresolution wasdulyadoptedby theCityCouncilataregularmeetingthereofheldon the19thdayof December 2023, by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers Barich, Davis, Guzman -Lowery, Saucedo; Mayor Tejeda NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAINED: None
e Donaldson, City Clerk
3 I:\Resolutions\Res8500- 8599\8528 Adopting a FeeSchedulefor the Inclusionary Housing In -Lieu Fee.docx-ms Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
492 of 932
Attachment A
In -lieu Fee Payment Schedules
Per Square Foot of Total Leasable or Saleable Area in Project of Units
Ownership
Housing
Developments
Apartment
Developments
10 0. 70 1.39
11 1.40 2. 78
12 2. 10 4. 18
13 2. 80 5. 57
14 3. 50 6. 96
15 4. 20 8. 35
16 4. 90 9. 75
17 5. 60 11. 14
18 6. 30 12. 53
19 7. 00 13. 92
20 7. 70 15. 32
21 8.40 16. 71
22 or more 9. 10 18. 10
4 I:\Resolutions\Res 8500- 8599\8528Adopting a Fee Schedulefor the Inc1usionaryHousing In -Lieu Fee.docx-ms Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
493 of 932
Attachment B
Fractional In -lieu Fee Payment Calculations
Measured Per Square Foot of the Leasable Area of One Unit in an Apartment Complex Affordability Gap Per Inclusionary Unit
Average Unit Size ( Square Feet of Leasable Area)
In -lieu Fee Per Square Foot of One Unit
Fraction
171, 900
973
176. 80
Fractional In -lieu Fee: Total Fractional In -lieu Fee:

Per Square Foot of One Unit Apartment Development

0. 10 $ 17. 70 $ 17, 210

0. 20 $ 35. 40 $ 34, 430

0. 30 $ 53. 00 $ 51, 540

0. 40 $ 70. 00 $ 68, 760

0. 50 $ 88. 40 $ 85, 970

0. 60 $ 106. 10 $ 103, 180

0. 70 $ 123. 80 $ 120, 400

0. 80 $ 141. 40 $ 137, 510

0. 90 $ 159. 10 $ 154, 720

1. 00 $ 176. 80 $ 171, 940
5 C\Resolutions\Res 8500-8599\ 8528Adopting a Fee Schedule for the Inclusionary Housing In -Lieu Fee.docx-ms Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
494 of 932
Fractional In -lieu Fee Payment Calculations
Measured Per Square Foot of the Saleable Area of One Unit in an Ownership Housing Development
Affordability Gap Per Inclusionary Unit
Average Unit Size ( Square Feet of Saleable Area)
In -lieu Fee Per Square Foot of One Unit
Fraction
442, 000
2430
181. 90
Fractional In -lieu Fee: Total Fractional In -lieu Fee:

Per Square Foot of One Unit Apartment Development

0. 10 $ 18. 20 $ 44, 230

0. 20 $ 36. 40 $ 88, 450

0. 30 $ 54. 60 $ 132, 680

0. 40 $ 72. 80 $ 176, 900

0. 50 $ 91. 00 $ 221, 130

0. 60 $ 109. 10 $ 265,110

0. 70 $ 127. 30 $ 309, 340

0. 80 $ 145. 50 $ 353, 570

0. 90 $ 163. 70 $ 397, 790

1. 00 $ 181. 90 $ 442, 020
6 C\Resolutions\Res8500-8599\8528 Adopting a FeeSchedulefor the Inclusionary Housing In -Lieu Fee.docx-ms Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
495 of 932
City Council Meeting L. 3.

DATE: 10/01/2024
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
SUBJECT: Consideration of a Memorandum of Understanding Regarding Planning and Funding of the Santa Ana Wash Wildland Trails, and Mutual Covenant (Development Services Director Desatnik) MOTION(S):

If the City Council determines that staff’s recommendation is appropriate, the following motion is provided:

I move that the City Council approve the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) Regarding Planning and Funding of the Santa Ana Wash Wildland Trails.

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends the City Council approve the MOU Regarding Planning and Funding of the Santa Ana Wash Wildland Trails between the City of Highland, the City of Redlands and the San Bernardino Valley Water Conservation District, Robertson’s Ready Mix, and Cemex Materials Pacific, LLC.

DISCUSSION:

The Wash Plan Habitat Conservation Plan (Wash Plan HCP) is a regional land use concept that permits and relocates a series of sand and gravel mining lease areas to locations adjacent to existing mining, and creates a habitat preserve per the requirement of these permits for a number of regional land use projects, called "Covered Activities." The Wash Plan HCP has received federal approval and is in the process of obtaining permits from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife. The San Bernardino Valley Water Conservation District (Conservation District) is implementing the Wash Plan HCP to allow the development, expansion, and maintenance of facilities for both municipal and commercial entities within the Wash Plan HCP area, including those of the City, while providing protected habitat for multiple Federal and State protected species that are found within the Wash Plan HCP area.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
496 of 932
species that are found within the Wash Plan HCP area.

The Trails MOU focuses on wildland trails that fall on Conservation District property, is proposed with a twenty (20) year term, and defines the respective parties' roles in permitting and allowing public access to the wildland trails over time. It designates the Conservation District as the lead agency for any environmental review or permitting that may be required apart from that already completed for the Wash Plan HCP, as well as the lead implementing and operating agency for the wildland trails.

In November 2016, the Conservation District approved the Wash Plan Trails Master Plan (Trails Plan), which describes a network of expanded trails and recreational opportunities, including: approximately twenty-three (23) miles of trails joining the existing trail networks in Highland and Redlands. The 4,500- acre Santa Ana River Wash provides a large, unique open space area supporting both natural habitat and recreational opportunities for residents of the area. One of the activities of the Wash Plan HCP is the development of a trail system for pedestrians and cyclists within the Wash Plan Preserve, located north of the Santa Ana River, on land primarily owned by the Conservation District in the cities of Highland and Redlands. (Exhibits A & B) The Conservation District's implementation of the Wash Plan HCP is now proceeding to a point where trail development can begin. The City of Highland has already adopted this MOU and the Conservation District has informed Robertson’s Ready Mix, and Cemex Materials Pacific, LLC (jointly referred to as the "Miners") of the pending MOU adoption by the city. The MOU specifies funding contributions, including a one-third share contribution from the Conservation District and each Miner will contribute a one-third share from fees collected by the city or, unless otherwise mutually agreed upon, the Conservation District will directly invoice the Miners.

ALTERNATIVES:

City Council may elect not to approve the action and provide alternative direction to staff.

STRATEGIC PLAN:

Not applicable.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
497 of 932
SUBMITTED BY:

Brian Desatnik, Development Services Director
RECOMMENDED BY:

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

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

Tricia Munoz, Development Services/Management Analyst
Fiscal Impact
Discussion:

There is no impact on the General Fund for the construction or operations of trails within the Upper Santa Ana River Wash Plan. The subject MOU specifies funding contributions from the San Bernardino Valley Water Conservation District and from the mining operators through their respective Conditional Use Permits (CUP) for areas permitted for mining under the CUP 948 - Silt Pond Quarry: RRM, Condition No. E.32 (MMP REC-01, REC-02 and REC-3); CUP 949 - East Quarry South: RRM, Condition No. E.32 (MMP REC-01, REC-02, and REC-3); CUP 950 - East Quarry North: Cemex, Condition No. E.32 (MMP REC-01, REC-02, and REC-3); CUP 951 - West Quarry: Cemex, Condition No.

E.32 (MMP REC-01, REC-02, and REC-3); CUP 952 - Alabama Street Quarry:

Cemex, Condition No. E.32 (MMP REC-01, REC-02, and REC-3); and CUP 964 - Plunge Creek Quarry: RRM, Condition No. E.32 (MMP REC-01, REC-02 and REC-3). The trails infrastructure improvement costs are estimated to be $200,000, and the annual operating and maintenance costs are estimated to be $84,000.

Attachments
Five Party Trails Funding Agreement
Exhibit "A" Planned Trails and Existing Local Trails and Connections Exhibit "B" Planned Wildland Trails
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
498 of 932

1 of 9

RECORDING REQUESTED BY
AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO:

San Bernardino Valley Water Conservation District
1630 West Redlands Boulevard, Suite A
Redlands, CA 92373-8032
Attention: General Manager

FREE RECORDING REQUESTED

UNDER GOVERNMENT CODE
SECTION 6103

(Space Above For Recorder’s Use)

Memorandum of Understanding re Planning and Funding of Santa ana Wash Wildland Trails and Mutual Covenant

by and between the City of Highland, the City of Redlands, the San Bernardino Valley Water Conservation District, Robertson’s Ready Mix, and Cemex Materials Pacific, LLC

RECITALS

This “MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING RE PLANNING AND FUNDING OF SANTA ANA WASH WILDLAND TRAILS AND MUTUAL COVENANT ” (“MOU”) is entered into this 1st day of October 2024 (“Effective Date” ), by and between the CITY O F HIGHLAND, “(Highland”), the CITY OF REDLANDS (“Redlands”), the SAN BERNARDINO VALLEY WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT (“District”), ROBERTSON’S READY MIX (“RRM”), AND CEMEX MATERIALS PACIFIC, LLC. (“Cemex”). Highland and Redlands are sometimes referred to collectively hereunder as “Cities .” RRM and Cemex are sometimes referred to collectively hereunder as “Miners.” This MOU is entered into in consideration of all the following:

RECITALS:

WHEREAS, Cities are both municipal corporations, and general law cities in the State of California. As such, Cities have the statutory authority to set aside, improve, operate, and maintain property for public recreational purposes, including tr ails. This authority draws from, inter alia, Government Code section 66477, and common law municipal powers.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
499 of 932

2 of 9

WHEREAS, District is a California Water Conservation District duly formed and existing under Water Code sections 74000 et seq. District has as its primary purpose the capture, spread, and recharge of water, both native and imported, over groundwater recharge facilities it owns, operates, and leases, and the stewardship of lands for compatible water supply and quality, mineral production, and the preservation of sensitive habitats.

WHEREAS, RRM is a Limited Partnership, and CEMEX MATERIALS PACIFIC is a California Limited Liability Corporation. Both Miners hold Conditional Use Permits f rom the Cities , consisting of the following:

For City of Redlands:

CUP 948 - Silt Pond Quarry: RRM
CUP 949 - East Quarry South: RRM
CUP 950 - East Quarry North: Cemex
CUP 951 - West Quarry: Cemex
CUP 952 - Alabama Street Quarry: Cemex
CUP 964 - Plunge Creek Quarry: RRM

For the City of Highland:

Permit (CUP-007-004)(Planning Commission Resolution No. 09-005, approved on June 2, 2009): RRM
Permit (CUP-007-005)(Planning Commission Resolution No. 09-006, approved on June 2, 2009:

Cemex

(“Collectively, the “Mining Entitlements”).

WHEREAS, District owns or otherwise holds legal possessory interests over substantial holdings of land within the Santa Ana River Wash. The 4,500-acre Santa Ana River Wash provides a large, unique open space area supporting both natural habitat and recreational opportunities to residents of the rapidly urbanizing East Valley . The District has initiated, and is now implementing, the Upper Santa Ana River Wash Habitat Conservation Plan ( “Wash Plan”) to allow development, expansion, and maintenance of facilities for both municipal and commercial entities within the Wash, including those of the District and Cities, while providing protected habitat for multiple Federal and State protected species that are found within the Wash . District has obtained an Incidental Take Permit for the Wash Plan, which includes as one of the covered activities the establishment of recreational trails.

WHEREAS, The parties, in collaboration with each other, formulated and approved the Wash Plan Trails Master Plan (November 2016) (“Trails Plan”) to combine the Cities’ legal authority to establish trails, with the District’s land and conservation area mana gement authority and existing permits, in order to expand public recreational trails as part of the long-term land uses for the Santa Ana River Wash. The Trails Plan is incorporated into, and was reviewed with the same EIR/EIS, as the Wash Plan. The Trai ls Plan describes a paved and unpaved trail system for pedestrians, Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
500 of 932

3 of 9

street cyclists, mountain bikers and equestrian users within and adjacent to the Wash Plan Preserve located north of the Santa Ana River, within the jurisdictional boundaries of the Cities.

WHEREAS, the Trails Master Plan proposes an interconnected system of 23.1 miles of trails, including Class 1, 1-B, 2 and 4 segments, to the existing trail networks in Highlands and Redlands.

A map of such proposed trails from the Trails Plan is attached as Exhibit “A.” These trails would provide legal access for pedestrians, street cyclists, mountain bikers and equestrian users within and adjacent to the Wash Plan Preserve. Approximately 2.5 miles of trails are already built and legally accessible via pub lic rights of way (e.g. bike lanes on paved roadways), 7 miles of trails would be opened along existing, unpaved access roads, and an additional 13 miles of paved trails would be developed by Highland, Redlands, San Bernardino County Transportation Authority, or other entities within existing or future public rights of way.

WHEREAS, the Mining Entitlements all contain a condition of approval which requires the Miners, under their respective CUP, to submit a fair share amount, at a time agreed upon by the Wash Plan Task Force and the respective issuing City, to the issuing City for the maintenance of trails within the Wash Plan Planning Area, as set forth in the Trails Plan to be developed as part of the implementation of a Habitat Conservation Plan for the Planning Area. The amount of the cash deposit was to be determined by an implementation program outlined in the Trails Plan.

WHEREAS, the Mining Entitlements also contain a condition of approval which requires the Miners to submit a fair share amount, at a time agreed upon by the Wash Plan Task Force and the respective issuing City, to the issuing City for the exclusive use of trails education and outreach programs for the Planning Area, which was to focus on litter and pet waste, and was to include advertising, community outreach, strategic partnerships, media, youth education, and business and stakeholder outreach.

WHEREAS, all parties have reviewed the Wash Plan Habitat Conservation Program, the Trails Plan, and compared the provisions and requirements for recreational trails therein, and compared them to the requirements of the Mining Entitlements, with an eye toward determining the most efficient and reliable manner of funding the trail requirements of the Mining Entitlements, consistent w ith the District’s present and future plans for establishment, maintenance, and operation of recreational trails within the Planning Area , and in conjunction therewith, the Cities and the District have entered into that certain MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING RE PLANNING AND FUNDING OF SANTA ANA WASH WILDLAND TRAILS” This MOU is entered into under the authority of that agreement, and as an implementing measure of certain of the funding aspects of same.

WHEREAS, all parties have determined that, in lieu of a one -time, lump sum payment, and the inherent uncertainties involved in estimating trail establishment, maintenance, and operations costs one time for all time to calculate a one-time deposit payment, they would all benefit more from an annual payment of such costs as they are incurred over time, so that the Miners may be afforded the opportunity to remit such annual payments from operating revenues, should they occur, and spread the cost of such payments out over time.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
501 of 932

4 of 9

WHEREAS, the parties now have determined to satisfy the trails funding requirements of the Mining Entitlements though this MOU to effectuate the an annual budgeting and invoicing process by the District to the Miners, through which the District will act as the agent of the Cities in collecting the trail funding requirements of the Mining Entitlements over time directly from the Miners, and the Miners agree to pay a defined proportionate share of such amounts annually, over the life of the validity of the Mining Entitlements, through the procedures defined in this MOU.

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of all the foregoing, it is agreed among the parties as follows:

1. Recitals.

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

2. Term.

This MOU shall have a term correlative to the period of validity of the Mining Entitlements, and shall be binding on Cemex from the Effective Date until the last of the Mining Entitlements issued to Cemex expires or is otherwise terminated, and shall be binding on RRM from the Effective Date until the last of the Mining Entitlements issued to RRM expires or is otherwise terminated .

Provided, however, that termination of this MOU shall not terminate any separate trail funding or operating agreements the parties, or any of them, may have entered into as of the date this MOU itself is terminated , and any such agreements shall be governed by their own termination provisions, if any.

3. Trails Master Plan Budgeting.

3.1 Role of the Parties in Trails Plan Implementation, and Trails Establishment . The District shall develop, circulate, and approve an annual budget for the funding of the establishment, maintenance, and operation of the Trails Plan trails and appurtenant facilities for each fiscal year, which spans from July 1 to June 30 of each year. The budget shall be prepared by the District by March 31 of each year, for the following fiscal year, and shall be provided to the Cities and Miners for their review and analysis. The circulated budget shall include the upcoming fiscal year’s costs of the establishment, maintenance, and operations of the Planning Area’s trail facilities and appurtenances, including the costs such facilities or appurtenances generate to comply with any requirements of the Wash Plan Incidental Take Permit, or any other conditions of approval on any permit, entitlement, right of way, or other legal requirement upon the District touching upon or involving the Trails Plan facilities and appurtenances, or the property on which they are proposed to be located. In order to provide predictability in year -to-year budgeting, the circulated budget may include components for advance capital funding of future expenditures for larger scale Trails Plan facilities and appurtenances, provided, that such advance capital funding shall not be accrued by the District more than five (5) years without being applied to the facilities or appurtenances for which it is collected. The District shall make its staff reasonably available to respond promptly to any inquiries or information requests regarding the proposed budget. The Miners and the Cities shall have thirty (30) days to comment in writing upon such proposed budget, and to suggest any Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
502 of 932

5 of 9

revisions, additions, deletions, or corrections. The District shall consider all comments made to the budget, and answer any questions posed regarding its contents or level of funding, and as appropriate, with reference to the specific facilities and appurtenances encompassed in the Trials Plan. The District may accept, reject, or partially accept or reject any such suggestions, and shall prepare a final budget for approval by the District’s Board of Directors as part of the District’s annual budget process. Any objections to the propriety of items included in the annual budget, or the amounts for such items, remaining after District has reviewed and responded to comments shall be resolved by the District’s Board of Directors.

3.2 Invoicing and Funding. Upon approval by District of the annual budget, District shall provide written invoices to the Miners, with copies to the Cities, of their proportionate share thereof. Such proportionate share shall be determined by the District assuming 33.3% of the total of such budget, and the Miners bearing 66.7% of such budget. As between the Miners, their respective shares shall be apportioned based on their respective amounts of acreage in the Wash Plan Planning area, which the parties agree are 55% to Cemex, and 4 5% to RRM. The Miners may change this apportioned amount by mutual agreement between them both, and written notice to the District, provided that in no event will the amount of the overall budget the Miners are responsible to pay ever go below 66.7%. The Miners shall pay such invoices from the District within sixty (60) days following the date of the invoice. Late payments shall be subject to a one percent (1%) penalty per month, until paid in full. District shall report to the Cities the payment by the Miners of the invoiced amounts, within thirty (30) days of the receipt of such payments. In the event Cemex, RRM, either, or both default in or fail to pay the proportionate budget amounts hereunder, Cities may initiate CUP enforcement procedures or mechanisms on the Mining Entitlements applicable to the defaulting or delinquent party.

3.3 CEQA Review and Permitting . District will be the lead agency in connection with preparing, presenting, and prosecuting of any required CEQA review, or any additional permits required to establish, maintain, and operate the trails and appurtenant facilities provided in the Trails Plan. To the extent either of the Cities is the permitting authority for such permits, the applicable municipality shall be the applicant, and shall not charge District application, hearing, or process fees in connection with pursuit or issuance of the permi t. District’s reasonable fees, costs, and administrative expenses, including the reasonable costs of the time spent by District’s in-house staff, shall be recoverable by District, and shall be included in the budget prepared by the District, upon which the annual payments hereunder are based.

4. Payment Obligations Hereunder as Covenant Running with the Land.

Payment by the Miners of the proportionate amount of the annual budget amount for the establishment, maintenance, and operation of the trails specified in the Trails Plan for the Planning Area is intended by the parties to be, and is, a specific, enforceable condition on the Mining Entitlements, and a covenant and equi table servitude running with the land on the leasehold interests the Miners hold in the properties that are the subject of the Mining Entitlements. For Cemex, the burdened property for such c ovenant and equitable servitude is its leasehold interest in the District’s property under that certain “Mineral Lease for Extraction of Sand and Gravel Materials” recorded with the San Bernardino County Recorder as document 2021 -0067743, as such property is more specifically described in Exhibit “A” hereto. For RRM, the burdened Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
503 of 932

6 of 9

property for such covenant and equitable servitude is the leasehold interest in the District’s property under that certain “Lease Agreement for Mineral Excavations” dates October 5, 1992, as amended by that certain “Agreement” dated August 4, 2003, as such property is more specifically described in Exhibit “A” hereto. To the extent either the Cemex or RRM leases of District property subject to the Mining Entitlements is changed or amended, including but not limited to transfer of such leased premises after the land exchanges with the Bureau of Land Management as part of the Wash Plan, the parties will amend this Agreement to reflect the new or transferred lease premises as the applicable burdened property for Cemex, RRM, or both, as may be applicable. The benefitted property for all covenants hereunder is the District’s property within the Planning Area more specifically described in Exhibit “A” hereto. To the extent the benefitted property is transferred or otherwise conveyed by the District, including but not limited to transfer after the land exchanges with the Bureau of Land Management as part of the Wash Plan, the parties will amend this Agreement to reflect the new or transferred benefitted property owned by the District.

All parties acknowledge and agree that the covenants hereunder relate to the establishment, maintenance, and operation of recreational trials on the burdened and benefitted properties, which in turn relates to conditions upon which sand and gravel operations under the Mining Entitlements depend, and therefore “touch and concern” activities on all such properties. The payment obligations hereunder are and shall be binding on successors and assigns of all parties, until the expiration or earlier termination of this MOU. A copy of this MOU shall be recorded in the official records of San Bernardino County.

5. Indemnification.

Each party shall defend, hold harmless, and indemnify the other s and their officers, agents, and employees against any and all claims, demands, damages, costs, expenses, or liability arising out of, or in connection with, any acts performed under this Agreement by the indemnifying party, to the extent liability arises from the acts of the indemnitor, its officers, agents, or employees in the performance of this Agreement. Nothing in this indemnification constitutes nor shall be read as any waiver by the Cities or District of any requirements of the Tort Claims Act, Government Code sections 810 et seq. Nothing herein abridges any indemnifications provided by that parties to the

MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING RE PLANNING AND FUNDING OF SANTA ANA WASH WILDLAND TRAILS” among certain of the parties hereto.

5. No Implied Covenants.

All parties acknowledge and agree that except as specifically agreed in this MOU, no implied covenants attach to this MOU . Nothing set forth herein shall be deemed to bind any party’s legislative body to approve a ny specific trail facility or implementing agreement. Each party retains the sole discretion to authorize the use of its own funding or other resources in connection with the planning, construction, and maintenance and operation of public recreational trails.

6. Assignment.

This MOU may not be assigned by any party without the written consent of the other parties.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
504 of 932

7 of 9

7. Jurisdiction.

This MOU shall be governed by the laws of the State of California. If a court of competent jurisdiction declares any portion of this MOU invalid, illegal, or otherwise unenforceable, the remaining provisions shall continue in full force and effect, to the extent possible consistent with the finding of invalidity. Any dispute or action to enforce any obligation under this MOU shall be filed and resolved in a Superior Court in San Bernardino County, California. In the event of litigation arising from this MOU, each party to the MOU shall bear its own costs, including attorneys’ fees.

8. Integration and Interpretation.

This MOU constitutes the entire agreement among the parties on the matters encompassed herein, and supersedes all prior representations made by any of them, whether verbal or written.

Each party signing below represents to all the others that it is not signing this MOU under the influence of any duress or mistake, or on reliance on any representation made by any party not otherwise reflected in the language of this MOU. This MOU may only be amended by a written instrument, signed by all parties hereto. This MOU shall be interpreted in accordance with its regular meaning, and shall not be construed for or against any party by reason of authorship.

The headings of this agreement are for information only.

9. Effective Date and Corporate Authority.

This MOU shall be effective as to each signatory hereto upon execution by such party, and shall be effective as of the Effective Date specified above, even if the party’s signature occurs after the effective date. Each party signing below represents and warrants to all other parties that the person whose signature appears on its behalf below is authorized to sign and bind such party to the terms of this MOU, and that in so doing, that party is not thereby in breach of any other contract or agreement.

10. Signatures.

This MOU may be signed in counterparts, each of which shall constitute an original, and such counterparts shall together constitute one and the same agreement. The parties shall be entitled to sign and transmit an electronic signature of this MOU (whether by facsimile, PDF or other email transmission), which signature shall be binding on the party whose name is contained therein.

Each party providing an electronic signature agrees to promptly execute and deliver to the other party an original signed MOU upon request.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this MOU to be executed by their duly authorized officers or representatives as of the day and year first written above.

[SIGNATURES BEGIN ON NEXT PAGE]

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
505 of 932

8 of 9

CITY OF HIGHLAND (“HIGHLAND”)

By:______________________________

City Manager

APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM:

By: ________________________________
City Attorney

CITY OF REDLANDS (“REDLANDS”)

By:______________________________

City Manager

APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM:

By: ________________________________
City Attorney

SAN BERNARDINO VALLEY WATER
CONSERVATION DISTRICT (“DISTRICT”)

By:______________________________

General Manager

APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM:

By: ________________________________
General Counsel
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
506 of 932

9 of 9

CEMEX MATERIALS PACIFIC, LLC (“CEMEX”)

By:______________________________

Its ________________________

APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM:

By: ________________________________
General Counsel

ROBERTSON’S READY MIX, LTD. (“RRM”)

By:______________________________

Its ________________________

APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM:

By: ________________________________
General Counsel
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
507 of 932
-15-
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
508 of 932
-16-
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
509 of 932
City Council Meeting L. 4.

DATE: 10/01/2024
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
SUBJECT: Consideration of an agreement with American Landscape and Maintenance, Inc. for turf mowing contractual services within City parks and medians for a term of three years in the amount not-to-exceed $566,624 (Facilities and Community Services Director Crocker)
MOTION(S):

If the City Council determines that staff’s recommendation is appropriate, the following motion is provided:

I move that the City Council determine approval of an agreement for turf mowing contractual services within City parks and medians is exempt from environmental review pursuant to Section 15301(h) of the State's Guidelines implementing the California Environmental Quality Act; and

1. I move to approve an agreement with American Landscape and Maintenance, Inc.

2. RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that City Council approve an agreement with American Landscape and Maintenance, Inc. for turf mowing contractual services within City parks and medians for a term of three years in the amount not-to-exceed $566,624. Staff further recommends that the City Council determine approval of an agreement to provide turf mowing contractual services within City parks and medians is exempt from environmental review pursuant to Section 15301(h) of the State's guidelines implementing the California Environmental Quality Act.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
510 of 932
DISCUSSION:

The Facilities and Community Services Department oversees the daily maintenance of City parks and medians which includes mowing, edging, and various other maintenance services. Parks division staff perform routine maintenance and oversight of these areas in addition to utilizing outside contractual services on an as-needed basis. These additional outside services help ensure consistent maintenance and allow staff to focus on more specialized tasks within the City's park and medians.

Staff issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) in accordance with the City's procurement guidelines to provide daily maintenance of City parks and medians for the Facilities and Community Services Department. Thirty-four vendors were solicited, and seven proposals were received on May 21, 2024. A list of the proposed firms is as follows:

Firm Name Responsive
Proposer
Responsible
Proposer
Annual
Cost
Proposal
American Landscape &
Maintenance, Inc
X X X
CM Landscape X X X
Integrity Arborist &
Ecoscape, Inc
X X X
Leafwise Landscape,
LLC
X X X
Mariposa Landscapes,
Inc
X X X
RP Landscape &
Irrigation
X X X
US Landscapes, Inc - - -
A selection committee reviewed and ranked each organization based on their demonstrated competence and professional qualifications deemed necessary for the satisfactory performance of the services required in accordance with the City's procurement policies. US Landscapes, Inc. was deemed unresponsive as there was no fee proposal included. American Landscape and Maintenance, Inc. was selected as the most highly qualified firm, based on the response to the scope of work provided in the RFP.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
511 of 932
Approval of this agreement is categorically exempt from environmental review in accordance with Section 15301(h) as the landscape maintenance will be performed on existing public facilities.

ALTERNATIVES:

City Council may reject all bids and direct staff accordingly.

STRATEGIC PLAN:

Not Applicable.

SUBMITTED BY:

Tabitha Crocker, Facilities and Community Services Director RECOMMENDED BY:

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

Yvette M. Abich Garcia, City Attorney
Janice McConnell, Assistant City Manager
Christopher Boatman, Assistant City Manager
Danielle Garcia, Management Services/Finance Director
Dana Abramovitz-Daniel, Proccurement Manager
PREPARED BY:

Jocelynn Butters, Senior Administrative Assistant
Fiscal Impact
Fiscal Year: FY 2024-25
Amount: $566,654
Budgeted Y/N: Yes
Account No.: 101303.6710
Discussion:

Sufficient funding for this service is included in the Park Division's (101303) budget for Fiscal Year 2024-25 as approved by City Council. Costs associated with any future renewal terms of the agreement will be included in subsequent budget requests prepared by the Department.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
512 of 932

Attachments
Agreement
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
513 of 932

I:\cmo\Agreements\American Landscape and Maintenance, Inc. FY24-0026.docx-ms 1 AGREEMENT TO PERFORM NON-PROFESSIONAL SERVICES

FOR IMPROVEMENT TO PUBLIC BUILDINGS AND GROUNDS

This agreement for the provision of landscape maintenance services at City parks, medians, and Landscape Maintenance Districts (“Agreement”) is made and entered in this 1st day of October, 2024 (“Effective Date”), by and between the City of Redlands, a municipal corporation (“City”) and American Landscape and Maintenance, Inc., a California corporation (“Contractor”).

City and Contractor are sometimes individually referred to herein as a “Party” and, together, as the “Parties.” In consideration of the mutual promises contained herein, City and Contractor agree as follows:

ARTICLE 1 – ENGAGEMENT OF CONTRACTOR

1.1 City hereby engages Contractor to perform landscape maintenance services at City parks, medians, and Landscape Maintenance Districts services for City (the “Services”). The Services that Contractor shall perform are more particularly described in Exhibit “A,” titled “Scope of Services,” which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.

1.2 The Services shall be performed by Contractor in a professional manner, and Contractor 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 Contractors in the industry providing like and similar types of Services.

ARTICLE 2 – RESPONSIBILITIES OF CONTRACTOR

2.1 Contractor shall comply with all applicable federal, state and local laws and regulations in the performance of the Services including, but not limited, to all applicable Labor Code and prevailing wage laws and non -discrimination laws, including the Ameri cans with Disabilities Act. Pursuant to Labor Code section 1773.2, copies of the prevailing rates of per diem wages as determined by the Director of the California Department of Industrial Relations for each craft, classification or type of worker need ed to undertake the Services are on file at City’s Municipal Utilities and Engineering Department, located at the Civic Center, 35 Cajon Street, Suite 15A (Mailing: P.O. Box 3005), Redlands, California 92373.

2.2 Contractor acknowledges that if it violates the Labor Code provisions relating to prevailing wages that City may enforce such provisions by withholding payments to Contractor or its subcontractors pursuant to Labor Code section 1771.6.

2.3 If Contractor executes an agreement with a subcontractor to perform any portion of the Services, Contractor shall comply with Labor Code sections 1775 and 1777.7, and shall provide the subcontractor with copies of the provisions of Labor Code sections 1771, 1775, 1776, 1777.5, 1813 and 1815. Contractor acknowledges that the statutory provisions establishing penalties for failure to comply with state wage and hour laws and to pay prevailing wages may be enforced by City pursuant to Labor Code sections 1775 and 1813.

2.4 Contractor and its subcontractors shall comply with the provisions of Labor Code section 1776 regarding payroll records maintenance, certifications, retention and inspection.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
514 of 932

I:\cmo\Agreements\American Landscape and Maintenance, Inc. FY24-0026.docx-ms 2 2.5 Contractor acknowledges that eight (8) hours constitutes a legal day’s work pursuant to Labor Code section 1810.

2.6 Contractor shall comply with the provisions of Labor Code section 1777.5 as to apprenticeships, and Labor Code sections 1771, 1775, 1776, 1777.5, 1813 and 1815.

2.7 Pursuant to Public Contract Code section 7103.5(b), Contractor offers and agrees to assign to City all rights, title and interest in and to all causes of action it may have under section 4 of the Clayton Act (15 U.S.C. section 15) or under the Cartwright A ct (Chapter 2 (commencing with section 16700) of Part 2 of Division 7 of the Business and Professions Code), arising from purchases of goods, goods or materials pursuant to this Agreement.

ARTICLE 3 – RESPONSIBILITIES OF CITY

3.1 City shall make available to Contractor information in its possession that may reasonably assist Contractor in performing the Services.

3.2 City designates Tabitha Crocker, Facilities and Community Services 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 The term of this Agreement shall be from the Effective Date of this Agreement through June 30, 202 5 (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 Term”), on the same terms and conditions, by providing written notice to Contractor at least thirty (30) days prior to the expiration of the Initial Term or any Extended Term. The Initial Term and the Extended Terms are hereby collectively, referred to herein as the “Term” of this Agreement.

4.2 Contractor shall furnish a labor and material bond in the form attached hereto as Exhibit “B,” which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, in an amount equal to one hundred percent (100%) of the total compensation to be paid to Contractor pursuant to this Agreement.

ARTICLE 5 – PAYMENTS TO CONTRACTOR

5.1 The compensation for Contractor’s performance of the Services shall not exceed the amount of One Hundred Sixty-Six Thousand Six Hundred Fifty-Four Dollars ($166,654) for the Services provided during the Initial Term. The compensation for Contractor’s performance for the Services shall not exceed the amount of One Hundred Ninety Nine Thousand Nine Hundred Eighty-Five Dollars ($199,985) for the first Extended Term; and One Hundred Ninety Nine Thousand Nine Hundred Eighty Five Dollars ($199,985) for the second Extended Term, bringing the total possible amount of compensation to a not -to- exceed amount of Five Hundred Sixty-Six Thousand Six Hundred Twenty Four Dollars Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
515 of 932

I:\cmo\Agreements\American Landscape and Maintenance, Inc. FY24-0026.docx-ms 3 ($566,624). For the Initial Term and each Extended Terms, City shall pay Contractor on a time and materials basis up to the not to not-to-exceed amount in accordance with the rates specified in Exhibit “ C,” titled “Price and Fee Bid,” which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.

5.2 Contractor shall submit monthly invoices to City describing the Services performed during the preceding month. Contractor’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.

City shall pay Contractor no later than thirty (30) days after receipt and approval by City of Contractor’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 fir st 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 CONTRACTOR
City Clerk Daniel Stauffer, CEO
City of Redlands American Landscape and Maintenance, Inc. 35 Cajon Street PO Box 10428
P.O. Box 3005 (mailing) San Bernardino, CA 92423
Redlands, CA 92373 [email protected]
[email protected] 909-307-1674
(909) 798-7531 909-793-1492

ARTICLE 6 – INSURANCE AND INDEMNIFICATION

6.1 The following insurance coverage required by this Agreement shall be maintained by Contractor for the duration of its performance of the Services. Contractor shall not perform any Services unless and until the required insurance listed below is obtained by Contractor.

Contractor 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 Contractor is self-insured or exempt from the workers’ compensation laws of the State of California. Contractor shall execute and provide City with Exhibit “ D,” titled “Workers’ Compensation Insurance Certification,” which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, prior to performance of the Services.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
516 of 932

I:\cmo\Agreements\American Landscape and Maintenance, Inc. FY24-0026.docx-ms 4 B. Comprehensive General Liability 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. Business Auto Liability 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 Contractor owned vehicles used in connection with Contractor’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.

6.2 Contractor shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless City and its elected and appointed officials, employees and agents from and against any and all claims, losses and 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, Contractor, or its officers, employees and agents in performing the Services.

ARTICLE 7 – CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

7.1 Contractor 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 Contractor’s Services. Contractor 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 Contractor agrees it is not a designated employee within the meaning of the Political Reform Act because Contractor:

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 Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
517 of 932

I:\cmo\Agreements\American Landscape and Maintenance, Inc. FY24-0026.docx-ms 5 position specified in City’s Conflict of Interest Code under Government Code section 87302.

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

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 fe es for the use of in - house counsel by a Party.

8.2 Contractor shall not assign any of the Services, except with the prior written approval of City and in strict 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, results in City’s immediate termination of this Agreement.

8.3 Contractor is for all purposes under this Agreement an independent contractor and shall perform the Services as an independent contractor. Neither City nor any of its agents shall have control over the conduct of Contractor or Contractor’s employees, except as herein set forth. Contractor shall supply all necessary tools and instrumentalities required to perform the Services. Assigned personnel employed by Contractor are for its account only, and in no event shall Contractor 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. Contractor shall have no authority, express or implied, to act on behalf of City in any capacity whatsoever as an agent, nor shall Contractor 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 Contractor of City’s intent to terminate. If this Agreement is terminated by City, an adjustment to Contractor’s compensation shall be made, but (i) no amount shall be allowed for anticipated profit or unperformed Services, and (ii) any payment due Contractor at the time of termination may be adjusted to the extent of any additional costs to City occasioned by any default by Contractor. Upon receipt of a termination notice, Contractor 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 d ata, design calculations, drawings, specifications, reports, estimates, summaries and such other information and materials as may have been accumulated by Contractor in performing the Services. Contractor shall be compensated on a pro-rata basis for Services completed up to the date of termination.

8.5 Contractor 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 Contractor Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
518 of 932

I:\cmo\Agreements\American Landscape and Maintenance, Inc. FY24-0026.docx-ms 6 pursuant to this Agreement. Such books shall be available at reasonable times for examination by City at the office of Contractor.

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 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 Contractor.

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 Contractor have signed in confirmation of this Agreement.

CITY OF REDLANDS AMERICAN LANDSCAPE AND
MAINTENANCE, INC.

By: ___________________________ By: _________________________ Eddie Tejeda, Mayor Daniel Stauffer, CEO

ATTEST:

___________________________
Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
519 of 932

I:\cmo\Agreements\American Landscape and Maintenance, Inc. FY24-0026.docx-ms 7 EXHIBIT "A"

SCOPE OF SERVICES

1. GROUNDCOVER CARE

A. Turf grass Mowing:
• The Contractor shall mow all turf grass with adequately sharpened rotary type mowers as to provide a smooth and even cut without tearing of turf grass blades.
• The blade adjustment shall provide a uniform, level cut without ridges, depressions or scalping. All cool season turf grasses shall be cut with a power-driven rotary mower at a 2.5” height, and from November to February at a 2.5” – 3” height from March to October.
• Turf grass mowing heights may be adjusted by the Field Services Superintendent, or their authorized agent , during periods of turf grass renovation.
• Care shall be exercised to avoid depressions in the established grade from mowing when the soil is saturated.
• The Contractor shall submit, in writing, a mowing schedule within ten (10) days after the start of the maintenance contract. This mowing schedule shall be approved by the Field Services Superintendent or their authorized agent. Any alteration of the approved mowing schedule shall be submitted in writing to the Field Services Superintendent, or their authorized agent, for approval prior to implementation.

B. Turf Grass Edging and Trimming
• Turf grass edging and trimming shall be performed per frequency schedule at the time of mowing.
• Edging of turf grass shall be performed with a power edger containing a steel blade, the use of string trimmers (weed -eater) to edge turf areas is not a practice acceptable to the City. The use of a stick edger is acceptable.
• All turf grass adjacent to sidewalks, curbs, mowing strips, shrub beds, and where no improved surface exists, shall be edged in a neat uniform line.
• Where facilities include a softball or baseball field, the infield radius shall be edged regularly to keep radius clearly defined. Grass and weeds shall not encroach into the infield and shall be treated/removed immediately. • Trimming of turf grass shall be performed along walls, and around valve boxes, water meter boxes, backflow devices, trees, shrubs, or any structures located within the turf grass area.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
520 of 932

I:\cmo\Agreements\American Landscape and Maintenance, Inc. FY24-0026.docx-ms 8 • Tree trunk protectors shall be provided and installed, at no additional cost to the City, when string trimmers are utilized for trimming around the base of trees. The City may allow a sixteen-inch (16") diameter mulch ring around trees to eliminate continual string trimming. • A four-inch (4") barren strip shall be provided, and maintained, between turf grass areas and adjacent ground cover. Edging of turf grass and ground cover shall provide uniform delineation adjacent to this barren strip.
• Trimming of plant material may be required around sprinklers to provide maximum irrigation coverage.
• All clippings and trimmings shall be removed from the work site the same day work is performed and prior to the contractor vacating the work site. • After mowing and edging is completed, all adjacent walkways and gutters shall be swept or blown clean.
• Blowing and disposing of grass clippings into the City storm drain system and/or streets shall not be permitted.

C. Turf grass Fertilization (Upon Request)

• The turf grass shall be continually fertilized a minimum of 4 x per year with additional application if needed, to provide a healthy and vigorously growing turf grass with horticultural acceptable growth and color, as determined by the Field Services Superintendent or their authorized agent.
• Fertilization shall be performed with a balanced fertilizer, consisting of a 3-1-2 ratio, at a rate of one (1) pound of actual Nitrogen per 1,000 square feet of area. Any change in the fertilizer ratio and/or rate shall be submitted in writing and approved by the Field Services Superintendent or their authorized agent, prior to usage.
• The Contractor shall notify the Field Services Superintendent or their authorized agent, in writing, five (5) working days prior to any fertilizer application. This written document shall include the following:
o Location and exact date the fertilizer application will be performed.
o Type of fertilizer and method of application to be used. • The Contractor shall immediately irrigate (staff shall be present when irrigating during the day) after each fertilizer application and repair with sod (Dwarf Fescue) any damaged areas due to fertilizer/chemical burn. • All fertilizer applications shall be performed with properly calibrated equipment to provide a uniform application.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
521 of 932

I:\cmo\Agreements\American Landscape and Maintenance, Inc. FY24-0026.docx-ms 9 • Light verticutting and thatch removal of warm season turf grass (where present) shall be performed between September 30th and October 15th or as directed by the City Representative.
• Over-seeding shall be performed within two (2) days after verticutting with properly calibrated seeders. Warm season turf grass shall be over - seeded at a rate of ten (10) pounds of seed per 1,000 square feet. A 3-way dwarf type Bermuda grass seed shall be used. Seed tags shall be provided to the Field Services Superintendent or their authorized agent. Additional over-seeding shall be performed if less than 80% germination occurs within the first month.
• Top dressing shall be performed using a properly calibrated top-dressing machine and seed shall be topped with one-eight inch (1/8") of weed free topper. The topper must be approved by the Field Services Superintendent, or their authorized agent and shall not contain steer manure (City reserves the right to provide the topper needed if available and in stock).
• Reseeding of bare spots shall be performed continually throughout the year to reestablish turf to an acceptable quality. If quality does not meet the City acceptance contractor shall replace with sod (Bermuda grass, Dwarf Fescue or equal).
• The Field Services Superintendent or their authorized agent, will require the use of sod as a replacement material when deemed necessary. The Contractors shall be entitled to the wholesale cost of the sod only, provided the loss of turf grass was not due to the negligence of the Contractor. Sod shall be Bermuda grass or Dwarf Fescue.

D. Aeration (all parks)
• All turf grass shall be aerated four (4) times per year, once every quarter, starting July 1st. Aeration shall be performed with a ride on or a walk behind aerator machine which has one-half inch (1/2") to one inch (1") in diameter coring tines spaced no m ore than six inches (6") apart. The machine shall remove cores from the turf to a depth of 4-6”. Dragging or pulverizing of cores is acceptable.

E. Turf grass Irrigation
• All turf grass shall be adequately irrigated to maintain a healthy and attractive appearance. Irrigation runoff and over spray shall be minimized. Where possible, the turf grass irrigation shall be on a separate program from other plant material irrigation. Turf grass shall be irrigated in a method which promotes deep root growth.
• At facilities with softball and baseball infields, Irrigation shall be adjusted so as not to overlap into the infield mix. Any reports of saturated infield mix from irrigation shall be addressed immediately.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
522 of 932

I:\cmo\Agreements\American Landscape and Maintenance, Inc. FY24-0026.docx-ms 10 2. SHRUB CARE

A. Pruning of Shrubs
• Shrubs shall be pruned with sharp pruning tools. Use of hedge shears to prune shrubs will not be permitted.
• Shrubs shall be continually pruned, as necessary, to prevent encroachment of passageways, walks, streets, and view of signs. Shrubs shall be tapered to provide irrigation coverage and an aesthetically pleasing landscape.
• All pruning cuts shall be one-quarter inch (1/4") above a node (bud). No projections or stubs shall be allowed to remain.
• After pruning is completed, all adjacent walkways and gutters shall be left clean. Blowing and disposing of any debris into the Storm Drain system and/or streets shall not be permitted. If found, Contractor will face liquidating damages as follows; 1st violation $ 500.00, 2nd. violation • $1000.00, 3rd. violation and thereafter $3000.00 and/or possible cancellation of contracts.
• During blooming season, vines shall be trimmed minimally so as not to remove floral display areas.
• Pruning shall be done to maintain a well-groomed, natural growth habit, and encourage air movement through shrubs.
• The Contractor shall remove all clippings the same day shrubbery is pruned and prior to vacating the work site.
• Pruning of roses (except for trailing roses) shall be accomplished using best horticultural practices. The use of hedge shears to prune roses will not be permitted. Roses shall be deadheaded as needed and shall be heavy pruned once per year.
• New plantings, once approved by the City Representative, shall take place within a week from the date reported.

B. Shrub Fertilization
• Shrubs (including roses) shall be fertilized a minimum of 3x per year or as directed by the Field Services Superintendent, or their authorized agent, with a balanced fertilizer specific for the type of plants. Roses shall be fertilized once following heavy pruning and one additional time per year.
• Foliar fertilization may be performed when appropriate and will require the approval of the City Representative.

C. Shrub Irrigation
• All shrubs shall be adequately irrigated to maintain a healthy and Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
523 of 932

I:\cmo\Agreements\American Landscape and Maintenance, Inc. FY24-0026.docx-ms 11 attractive appearance. Irrigation runoff and over spray shall be minimized. Shrubs shall be irrigated in a method which promotes deep root growth.

D. Shrub Replacement
• All damaged, diseased (untreatable) or dead shrubs shall be replaced with the same species plant material that existed (unless a disease situation is discovered affecting the specie). Shrubs shall be replaced within 7 days after being identified by the con tractor or authorized agent. Size of the replacement plant material is to be determined by the authorized agent.

The Contractor shall be responsible for the complete removal and replacement of shrubs lost due to the Contractor's faulty maintenance or negligence, as determined by the Field Services Superintendent, or their authorized agent.
• Substitutions or any plant materials must have prior written approval by the Field Services Superintendent, or their authorized agent. • Original plans and specifications may be consulted to determine correct identification of species.
• All shrubs shall be guaranteed to live and remain in a healthy condition for the duration of the contract from the date of installation, inspection and verification by the Field Services Superintendent, or their authorized agent.
• Soil build-up around the crown of shrubs shall be continuously removed.

E. Vine Maintenance
• Vines shall be trimmed as needed to promote upright growth and shall be kept attached and contained on the structure.
• All vines shall be trimmed on a as needed basis by the contractor, the standard of the City is to trim vines one block below the top of the wall, the City understands that its vines in some sites are mature and have grown over the top of the wall, the contractor shall only be responsible to trim the vines that are solicited by our residents and will have to adhere to the standards herby mentioned. No vines will be allowed to grow in newly installed wood fences or wood fence extensions (above the top of the fence or block wall). Vines shall be trimmed tight and follow horticultural standards.

3. GROUNDCOVER CARE
• Groundcovers are low growing plants that grow in colonies to form a solid mat over the surface of the ground. The plants give a flat or two - dimensional effect to the landscape, such as, but not limited to, Honeysuckle, Myoporum, Senecio, Rosemary, Lantana, Ivy (spp.) Salvia (spp.)

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
524 of 932

I:\cmo\Agreements\American Landscape and Maintenance, Inc. FY24-0026.docx-ms 12 A. Edging and Trimming of Groundcover
• Edging of groundcover areas shall be performed monthly or as needed. • All groundcover adjacent to sidewalks, curbs, mowing strips, or where no improved surface exists, shall be edged in a neat, uniform line. • All groundcover shall be continually trimmed at the drip line of all shrubs.
• All groundcover shall be continually trimmed along walls, valve boxes, water meter boxes, backflow devices, or other structures located within the groundcover area as determined by the Field Services Superintendent, or their authorized agent. Thinning of groundcover may be required around sprinklers to provide maximum irrigation coverage. • All clippings and trimmings shall be removed from the work site in a legal manner the same day work is performed and prior to the Contractor vacating the work site.
• After edging or trimming, the Contractor shall clean all adjacent sidewalks or gutters.

B. Renovation of Groundcover Areas
• Groundcover planting shall be thinned and pruned for the health of the planting and the appearance of the site, or as required by the Field Services Superintendent or their authorized agent.

C. Replanting of Groundcover Areas
• Replanting shall be required to maintain the continuity of the groundcover areas that die back after awarding the contract. • Labor and replacement material costs shall be incurred by the Contractor.

D. Groundcover Irrigation
• All groundcover areas shall be adequately irrigated to maintain a healthy and attractive appearance.
• Irrigation runoff and overspray shall be minimized.

E. Groundcover Fertilization
• The groundcover shall be fertilized during growing season, minimum 1x per year, to provide a healthy and vigorously growing ground cover with horticultural acceptable growth and appearance, as determined by the Field Services Superintendent or their authorized agent. • Fertilizing shall be performed with a balanced fertilizer, consisting of a 1-1-1 ratio, at a rate of one pound (1 lb.) of actual Nitrogen per 1,000 square feet. Any change in the fertilizer ratio and/or rate shall be Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
525 of 932

I:\cmo\Agreements\American Landscape and Maintenance, Inc. FY24-0026.docx-ms 13 submitted in writing and approved by the Field Services Superintendent or their authorized agent, prior to usage.
• The Contractor shall immediately irrigate after each fertilizer application. • All fertilizer applications shall be performed with properly calibrated equipment to provide a uniform application.
• The Contractor shall notify the Field Services Superintendent or their authorized agent, in writing, five (5) working days prior to any fertilizer application. This written document shall include the location and exact date the fertilizer application will be performed, type of fertilizer and method of application to be used.

4. IRRIGATION INSPECTION

• The Contractor shall initially inspect and familiarize themselves with the entire irrigation system at all work sites and identify all needed repairs. • Required repairs shall be submitted to the Field Services Superintendent or their authorized agent, in a written statement within two (2) weeks after the start date of the Maintenance Contract. If a written statement, which documents required repairs, is not received by the authorized agent, within the stated timeframe, the entire system shall be inter preted as fully operational, and deemed acceptable by the Contractor and will become his sole responsibility to maintain. The City shall review and verify all submitted problems, repairs may be completed by the following methods:
• The Contractor shall file a monthly statement with his invoice certifying that all irrigation systems are functioning properly. If the Contractor fails to submit this statement, the invoice will be rejected until such date the statement is received.
• The Contractor shall inspect the operation of the irrigation system on a weekly basis for any malfunctions. In addition to regular testing, all irrigation systems shall be tested and inspected as necessary when damage is suspected, observed or reported.
• All system malfunctions, damage and obstructions shall be recorded, reported to the Field Services Superintendent or their authorized agent , and corrective action taken.

5. IRRIGATION MAINTENANCE AND REPAIRS
A. The Contractor shall maintain all irrigation systems, at no additional cost to the City, in such a way as to:
• Guarantee proper coverage and full working capability. • Make whatever adjustments may be necessary to prevent over spray or excessive runoff into street rights -of-way or other areas not meant to be irrigated.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
526 of 932

I:\cmo\Agreements\American Landscape and Maintenance, Inc. FY24-0026.docx-ms 14 • The Contractor shall repair or replace at no additional cost inoperable irrigation equipment to maintain a fully operational system, including but not limited to, pressure pipes from the water meter to the control valves, all irrigation non pressurized pip es, all manual and automatic valves, filters, basket strainers, pressure regulators, sprinkler heads, irrigation clamps and stakes, anti -drain valves, quick couplers, electrical wiring from the controller to the solenoid valves, emitters, drippers, valve boxes, controllers, valve markers, batteries, fittings and risers shall be the same as to removed manufacturer items unless prior approval has been granted by City representative in writing.
• Maintenance includes, but is not limited, tightening loose fittings and packing nuts; flushing sprinkler heads, pipes, nozzles, valves, filters, strainers, and backflow devices; adjusting sprinkler heads for proper coverage and to avoid irrigating hardscape including softball and baseball infield radius; anti -drain valves and pressure regulators, adjusting and lubricating controllers; and cleaning drip emitters, replace batteries for battery operated valves and maintain solar operated valves, relocation of irrigation mainline or lateral lines due to tree placements and roots.

B. Irrigation repairs shall be made within the following time limits:
• Mainline irrigation breaks shall be repaired within two (2) hours of identification or notification. All other irrigation repairs shall be made within one (1) day of identification or notification.
• Replacement of irrigation components shall match existing, or equivalent. Substitutions must be approved by the Field Services Superintendent or their authorized agent, in writing prior to installation.

6. WATER CONSERVATION
• The Contractor shall turn off all irrigation systems during periods of rainfall and/or times when suspension of irrigation is desirable to conserve water while remaining within the guidelines of good horticulturally acceptable maintenance practices.
• The Contractor shall comply with all City of Redlands Ordinances and/or Resolutions, which relate to water conservation.

7. CONTROLLER PROGRAMMING
A. Adequate soil moisture will be determined by programming the automatic sprinkler controllers as follows:
• Whenever possible, automatic irrigation shall be programmed to operate between the hours of 9:00 P.M. to 8:00 A.M. The Contractor shall be responsible for reprogramming controller during inclement weather to conserve water.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
527 of 932

I:\cmo\Agreements\American Landscape and Maintenance, Inc. FY24-0026.docx-ms 15 • Consideration must be given to the soil conditions, seasonal temperatures, wind conditions, humidity, runoff and erosion potential, and the relationship of conditions which affect day and night watering. • Extremely close attention shall be paid to the demands of the plants as influenced by their exposure to sun or shade. Also, the variation in the size of plants, as well as varietal differences must be considered. • The irrigation system will be controlled by the contractor in such a way as not to cause an excessively wet area which could interfere with the Contractor's ability to mow all turf grass.
• The Contractor, at the request of the Field Services Superintendent or their authorized agent, shall submit a copy of the irrigation schedule for each individual controller. This information is to be readily available upon request or available at the controller.

B. All landscape and turf areas shall be irrigated as required maintaining adequate growth and appearance with a schedule most conducive to plant growth.

8. IRRIGATION CONTROLLER
A. The Contractor shall maintain controller as-builts (controller charts) inside each controller cabinet where available.

B. All controller enclosures shall receive a granular chemical application as needed to prevent pest infestation. Any damages resulting from any insect infestation due to failure to apply the chemical shall be repaired/replaced by the contractor (no expense to the City).

C. Controllers and dome antennas shall be inspected and cleaned by the contractor 4 x per year and report damages or maintenance needs.

9. WEED CONTROL
• Weeds are defined in the dictionary as: “A wild plant growing where it is not wanted and in competition with cultivated plants." When classified by their gross morphological features, weeds are broken down into three major categories: grasses, sedges, and broadleaf weeds. Full control of these 3 categories of weeds will be achieved with a combination of selective and non -selective herbicides as well as mechanical removal. Weeds should not be visible.
• All areas within the specified maintenance area, including but not limited to, turf grass, shrub and ground cover areas, planters, tree wells, landscape areas, and softball/baseball infields shall be kept free of weeds at all times. • Weed removal shall consist of complete removal of all weeds, including top growth and roots. Weed control shall be performed as needed.
• Weeds shall be controlled either by hand, mechanical or chemical methods; however, the Field Services Superintendent or their authorized agent , may restrict the use of chemical weed control in certain areas.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
528 of 932

I:\cmo\Agreements\American Landscape and Maintenance, Inc. FY24-0026.docx-ms 16 10. DISEASE AND PEST CONTROL
• The Contractor shall regularly inspect all landscaped areas for the presence of disease, snail, insect or rodent infestation. The Contractor shall report any applied treatments within their next monthly billing. The Contractor shall identify the disease, snail, insect or rodent and specify control measures to be taken. The Contractor shall implement control measures, exercising extreme caution in the application of all spray materials, dust or other materials utilized.
• Approved control measures shall be continued until the disease, snail, insect or rodent is controlled to the satisfaction of the Field Services Superintendent or their authorized agent. The Contractor shall utilize all safeguards necessary during disease, snail, insect or rodent control operations to ensure safety of the public and the employees of the Contractor.
• The Contractor shall perform, at their sole expense, the following services:
o All work involving the use of chemicals will be accomplished by a State of California licensed pest control operator. A written recommendation by a person possessing a valid California Pest Control Advisor License for each chemical used is required prior to chemical application where required by law. o All chemicals requiring a special permit for their use must be registered by the Contractor with the County Agricultural Commissioner's Office and a permit obtained with a copy to the Field Services Superintendent or their authorized agent, prior to use.
o A copy of all forms submitted to the County Agricultural Commissioner shall be given to the Field Services Superintendent or their authorized agent , on a monthly basis.

11. USE OF CHEMICALS
• The Contractor shall submit a list of all chemical herbicides, pesticides, and rodenticides proposed for use under this contract for approval by the Field Services Superintendent or their authorized agent with the signed contract. Materials included on this list shall be limited to chemicals approved by the State of California Department of Food and Agriculture and shall include the exact brand name and generic formulation. The use of any chemical on the list shall be based on the recommendations of a California State Licensed Pest Control Advisor where required by law. • The use of chemicals shall conform to the current San Bernardino County Agriculture Commissioner regulations. No chemical herbicide, rodenticide or pesticide shall be applied until its use is approved, in writing, by the Field Services Superintendent or their authorized agent as appropriate for the purpose and area proposed. • Required spray equipment will consist of at least one (1) medium spray rig of 100 - gallon (minimum) capacity or more and backpack sprayers provided for each crew performing chemical landscape maintenance.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
529 of 932

I:\cmo\Agreements\American Landscape and Maintenance, Inc. FY24-0026.docx-ms 17 12. TURF BROADLEAF WEEDS
• Control of broadleaf weeds shall include proper notification with chemicals to be used, date, and time to the Field Services Superintendent or their authorized agent prior to starting date for approval.

13. LITTER
• All areas in the work sites shall be kept free of, but not limited to, the following items:
bottles, glass, broken glass, cans, paper, cardboard, metallic items, feces, leaves, tumbleweeds and other debris on a daily basis.
• The Contractor shall promptly remove from the work area all debris generated by their performance and dispose of the debris in a legal manner. The City does not allow any dumping of debris generated by your daily work in City facilities. • Hazardous waste as well as homeless belongings shall not be picked up. Contractor shall contact City Representative to arrange proper disposal by City forces.

14. TRASH CONTAINERS & DUMPSTER ENCLOSURES
• Contractors shall remove all litter, replace liners as needed, and check the condition of the trash container and hardware. Containers shall be replaced as needed (City to provide). Contractor shall use liners that are a minimum of 1.5 mil and be clear or black in color. Trash container shall be inspected daily, seven days per week. • Trash containers shall be painted at least once per year as directed by the Field Services Superintendent or their authorized agent . Contractor to provide labor and material.

Container holders should be set so that the bottom of the container is 12” from the surface of the ground. Bent or broken container holders must be repaired, reset or replaced ASAP.
• Dumpster enclosures will be kept weed and debris free. Odors and excessive staining must be addressed by power washing the affected area. Vandalism should be reported promptly. If locks need to be replaced, please reach out to your Authorized Representative.

15. TABLES AND BENCHES
• All tables and benches shall be inspected daily for any unsafe conditions. Any tightening of loose nuts and bolts shall be reported to City staff by the contractor. Any repairs needed above and beyond tightening of loose nuts and bolts shall be reported to the City promptly.

16. GRAFFITI
• The Contractor shall contact City Representative to report graffiti.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
530 of 932

I:\cmo\Agreements\American Landscape and Maintenance, Inc. FY24-0026.docx-ms 18 17. GENERAL
A. Trash Removal
• Remove all trash and accumulated debris from the work sites daily. In addition, any type of feces is also to be removed from the walkways, turf or ground cover areas and dumpster areas.

B. Policing of Areas
• All maintained areas shall be policed based on frequencies.

C. Curb and Gutter Maintenance
• The Contractor is responsible for removal of all weeds and grass growing in and around the curb and gutter area monthly. The Contractor is responsible for ensuring the roadway is cleared of all dirt and debris within four (4) feet of the curb and gutter in all areas adjacent to maintenance responsibilities.

D. Walkway Maintenance
• Walkways shall be cleaned immediately following mowing and edging and cleaned by use of power sweeping or blower equipment. All walkway cracks and expansion joints shall be maintained weed and grass free at all times.

E. Drain Maintenance
• All drains and catch basins shall be kept free of siltation and debris at all times. All V-ditches and drainage areas shall be kept clean and edged weekly by the Contractor. Cleaning of drain basins shall be done monthly, Contractor shall inspect weekly to make sure that grates are secured, if missing, Contractor shall replace at City's expense. Damaged grates due to Contractor's operations shall be replaced at Contractors expense.

F. Removal of Leaves
• Accumulation of leaves shall be removed from all designated landscape areas on a monthly basis and under trees once per month or more as needed.

18. REPAIR AND SERVICE OF WALKWAYS AND MISCELLANEOUS

IMPROVEMENTS
• Walkways and Service Roads - All walkways and service roads, if any, shall be maintained by the Contractor so as to keep the integrity of the walking or driving surface in a safe, unimpaired condition.
• The Contractor will not be responsible for total replacement of roadways or walkways as a result of normal deterioration but will be required to replace all improvements damaged by his negligence.
• It will be the responsibility of the Contractor to repair or replace miscellaneous improvements such as signs and mowing strips, or any other structural improvements within the work sites, unless otherwise specified. The Contractor shall be entitled to additional compensation for these services as stated. The contractor shall communicate any improvements needed prior to repairs to the Field Services Superintendent, or their authorized agent, for proper approvals.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
531 of 932

I:\cmo\Agreements\American Landscape and Maintenance, Inc. FY24-0026.docx-ms 19 19. MULCH
Mulch beds shall be replenished 2 times per year.

20. DECOMPOSED GRANITE/GRASS PAVER AREA
Contractor shall be responsible to drag with cocoa mat or similar and rake all decomposed granite areas monthly and to replenish displaced or missing material at his own cost as needed.

Moistening the material and use of a mechanical compactor is required when backfilling DG areas. Decomposed granite areas are to keep a grading that is acceptable and safe to walk on.

In the event of inclement weather, the City will compensate the contractor for the replacement of material for damage created by the storm.

21. MONUMENT SIGNS
Contractor shall be responsible to keep the monument signs free of litter, debris, silt and cobwebs.

The Contractor shall be responsible to paint (if needed) areas that have a painted surface a minimum of once per year. The Contractor shall keep shrubs and vegetation edged and trimmed to a height that displays the complete wording on the monument.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
532 of 932

I:\cmo\Agreements\American Landscape and Maintenance, Inc. FY24-0026.docx-ms 20 EXHIBIT "B"

LABOR AND MATERIAL BOND

Whereas, the City of Redlands, State of California, and American Landscape and Maintenance, Inc. (hereinafter designated as “Principal”) have entered into an agreement (the “Agreement”) whereby Principal agrees to Description of Improvement Services to Public Buildings and/or grounds (the “Work”), which said agreement, dated October 1, 2024 , and titled as “Agreement to Perform Non -Professional Services for Improvement to Public Builds and Grounds” is hereby referred to and made a part hereof; and

Whereas, under the terms of the Agreement, Principal is required before commencing the performance of the Work, to file a good and sufficient Labor and Material bond with the City of Redlands to secure the claims to which reference is made in Title 3 (commencing with Section 9550) of Part 6 of Division 4 of the Civil Code of the State of California.

Now, therefore, said Principal and the undersigned as corporate surety, are held firmly bound unto the City and all contractors, subcontractors, laborers, material men and other persons employed in the performance of the Agreement and referred to in the aforesaid Code of Civil Procedure in the sum of Five Hundred Sixty-Six Thousand Six Hundred Twenty Four Dollars ($566,624) for materials furnished or labor thereon of any kind, or for amounts due under the Unemployment Insurance Act with respect to such work or labor, that said surety will pay the same in an amount not exceeding the amount hereinabove set forth, and also in case suit is brought upon this bond, will pay, in addition to the face amount thereof, costs and reasonable expenses and fees, including reasonable attorneys’ fees, incurred by the City in successfully enforcing such obligation, to be awarded and fixed by the court, and to be taxed as costs and to be included in the judgment therein rendered.

It is hereby expressly stipulated and agreed that this bond shall insure to the benefit of any and all persons, companies and corporations entitled to file claims under Title 3 (commencing with Section 9550) of Part 6 of Division 4 of the Civil Code, so as to give a right of action to them or their assigns in any suit brought upon this bond.

Should the condition of this bond be fully performed, then this obligation shall become null and void, otherwise it shall be and remain in full force and effect.

The surety hereby stipulates and agrees that no change, extension of time, alteration or addition to the terms of the Agreement or the specifications accompanying the same shall in any manner affect its obligations on this bond, and it does hereby waive notice of any such change, extension of time, alteration or addition.

In witness whereof, this instrument has been duly executed by the Principal and surety above named, on _______________________, 2024.

(SEAL) (SEAL)

(Contractor) (Surety)
BY:
(Signature) (Signature)

Address:
_______________________________________
________________________________________

(Seal and Notarial Acknowledgment of
Surety)
Telephone( ) ___________________________

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
533 of 932

I:\cmo\Agreements\American Landscape and Maintenance, Inc. FY24-0026.docx-ms 21 EXHIBIT “C”

FEE SCHEDULE

Description Monthly Fee Annual Fee
Locations of City Median and LMDs – Full-
Service Landscape Maintenance (may include
mowing)
Includes Irrigation Technician (8 hours per week)
$3,299.13 $39,589.51

Description Cost Per Mow Annual Fee
(38 Mows)
Locations of City Parks – Mowing Service Only $4,220.92 $160,394.98

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
534 of 932

I:\cmo\Agreements\American Landscape and Maintenance, Inc. FY24-0026.docx-ms 22 EXHIBIT “D”

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 insurers 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 wit h 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.

AMERICAN LANDSCAPE AND MAINTENANCE, INC.

By: Date: _______ __________
Daniel Stauffer, CEO

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
535 of 932
City Council Meeting L. 5.

DATE: 10/01/2024
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
SUBJECT: Consideration of a Public Work Contract with Matich Corporation for the Pavement Management Program (PMP) 2024 Street
Resurfacing Project for an amount not-to-exceed $4,677,377, approval of an additional appropriation in the amount of $815,066, and determination that the Project is categorically exempt from environmental review pursuant to Section 15301 of the State's Guidelines for 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 the City Council determine approval of the contract and construction of the PMP 2024 Street Resurfacing Project is categorically exempt from environmental review in accordance with Section 15301 of the State’s guidelines implementing the California Environmental Quality Act; and

1. I move that the City Council approve the PMP 2024 Street Resurfacing Project Plans and Specifications, and award a Public Work Contract to Matich Corporation for an amount not-to-exceed $4,677,377; and

2. I move that the City Council approve an additional appropriation in the amount of $815,066.

3. RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that City Council determine approval of a Public Works Contract and construction of the PMP 2024 Street Resurfacing Project is categorically exempt from environmental review in accordance with Section 15301 of the State’s guidelines implementing the California Environmental Quality Act. Staff further recommends City Council approve the PMP 2024 Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
536 of 932
Street Resurfacing Project Plans and Specifications, award a Public Works Contract to Matich Corporation for an amount not-to-exceed $4,677,377, and approve an additional appropriation of $815,066 from the unassigned PARIS Fund balance.

DISCUSSION:

The City's 2020 Pavement Management Program (PMP 2020) identifies the scheduled maintenance and reconstruction of City streets at the appropriate time intervals in order to extend their overall life expectancy in the most efficient and economical manner. In addition, the PMP 2020 establishes a comprehensive process to prioritize the rehabilitation of the City’s street system and is a powerful tool to determine how best to utilize the City’s available financial resources. The PMP 2020 includes a project forecasting strategy that follows the PMP maintenance and rehabilitation project budgets and addresses the specific needs of each street. Since completion of the PARIS program, the City has completed paving approximately one hundred twelve (112) lane miles of streets.

Staff utilized the PMP 2020 to prepare plans and specifications for the PMP 2024 Street Resurfacing Project (Project), which includes resurfacing approximately twenty-eight (28) lane miles of streets, selective replacement of curb and gutter, and striping replacement. Additionally, the Project includes resurfacing employee and customer parking lots and the brine cap at the Wastewater Treatment Facility. All known utility agencies operating within the City have been contacted to coordinate construction activities within the Project limits.

Staff prepared plans and specifications and advertised the Project for bidding.

On August 22, 2024, the City Clerk’s office received and opened the following three (3) bids for the Project:

BID OPENING REPORT SUMMARY
Bidders Bid Amount
Matich Corporation, Highland, CA $4,667,377.00
R.J. Noble Company, Orange, CA *$6,045,245.35
All American Asphalt, Corona, CA *$6,071,228.60
*An arithmetic error was discovered in the bid proposal. The total bid amount was corrected and highlighted in the attached bid analysis to identify arithmetic errors. The errors did not affect ranking.

Each bid was reviewed by staff to determine responsiveness to bid requirements and Matich Corporation was determined to be the lowest responsive bidder.

Staff recommends awarding a Public Works Contract to Matich Corporation for an amount not-to-exceed $4,677,377. The Project will be completed within one hundred ten (110) working days after the date of issuance of a Notice to Proceed to the Contractor.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
537 of 932
This project is categorically exempt from environmental review in accordance with Section 15301 of the State's guidelines implementing the California Environmental Quality Act as the Project involves rehabilitation and maintenance of existing streets and there is no expansion to the existing use.

ALTERNATIVES:

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

STRATEGIC PLAN:

Priority D:

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

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
Janice McConnell, Assistant City Manager
Danielle Garcia, Management Services/Finance Director
Goutam K. Dobey, City Engineer
PREPARED BY:

Gerard Nepomuceno, Civil Engineer
Fiscal Impact
Fiscal Year: FY 24/25
Appropriation Required Y/N: Yes
Amount: $815,066
Budgeted Y/N: Yes
Account No.: 211910; 521910
Discussion:

The total cost of the Project is $4,677,377. Portions of the Project include Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
538 of 932
The total cost of the Project is $4,677,377. Portions of the Project include street reconstruction within San Bernardino County rights-of-way. This construction cost, estimated to be $815,066, is not included in the MUED budget. The City is required to pay this construction cost up front and will be reimbursed by San Bernardo County in accordance with the approved cost share agreement. Staff recommends City Council approval of an additional appropriation of $815,066 from the unassigned PARIS Fund (211) to reconcile this unanticipated up front expense. The costs for the remaining Project elements are included in the approved MUED budget.

Attachments
A. Matich Public Works Contract
B. Bid Opening Report
C. Bid Analysis
D. Location Map
E. Additional Appropriation Form
PMP Plans
PMP Specifications
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
539 of 932
1 I:\cmo\Agreements\Matich Corporation Public Works Contract -PMP 2024 Street Resurfacing Project FY24-0027.docx-ms

PUBLIC WORK CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT

This Public Work Construction contract (“Contract”) is made and entered into this 1st day of October, 2024, by and between the City of Redlands, a municipal corporation, organized and existing under the laws of the State of California (hereinafter “City”), and Matich Corporation, a California corporation (hereinafter "Contractor"). City and Contractor are sometimes individually referred to herein as a “Party” and, together, as the “Parties.”

In consideration of the mutual promises contained herein, City and Contractor agree as follows:

1. SCOPE OF WORK: Contractor shall furnish all materials and will perform all of the work for the following: PMP 2024 Street Resurfacing Project, complete all items as required by the Contract Documents (as herein defined) and Specifications for City’s PMP 2024 Street Resurfacing Project, Project No. 211010 (the “Work”).

2. CONTRACT SUM: City shall pay Contractor the sum of Four Million Six Hundred Seventy Seven Thousand Three Hundred Seventy Seven Dollars ($4,677,377) as consideration for its performance of the Work in accordance with the terms and conditions set forth in the Contract Documents. Pursuant to Public Contract Code Section 22300, Contractor has the option to deposit securities with an escrow agent as a substitute for retention of earnings required to be withheld by City pursuant to an escrow agreement as set forth in Public Contract Code section 22300.

3. TIME FOR COMPLETION: The Work shall be completed within one hundred ten (110) working day(s) as defined in Section 1 -2 of the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction “Greenbook” from and after the date of City’s issuance of a Notice to Proceed to Contractor.

4. LIQUIDATED DAMAGES: Contractor’s failure to complete the Work within the time allowed will result i n damages being sustained by City. Such damages are, and will continue to be, impracticable and extremely difficult to determine. Accordingly, Contractor shall pay to City, or have withheld from monies due to Contractor, the sum of one thousand dollars ($1000) for each working day as defined in Section 1-2 of the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction “Greenbook” in excess of the specified time for completion of the Work. Execution of this Contract shall constitute agreement by City and Contractor that one thousand dollars ($1000) per day is the estimated damage to City caused by the failure of Contractor to complete the work within the allowed time. Such sum is liquidated damages and shall not be construed as a penalty, and may be deducted from payments due Contractor if such delay occurs.

5. CONTRACT DOCUMENTS: This Contract incorporates by reference the following: Notice Inviting Bids, Instructions to Bidders, Contractor’s Proposal, Bid Bond, Agreement, Performance Bond, Labor and Material Bond, Plans, General Conditions, Special Provisions and Specifications, and any addenda thereto (collectively, the “Contract Documents”).

6. ATTORNEYS' FEES: In the event any action is commenced to enforce or interpret the terms or conditions of this Contract, or the Contract Documents, the prevailing Party in such action, in addition to any costs and other relief, shall be entitled to recover its reasonable attorneys’ fees, including fees for use of in-house counsel by a Party.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
540 of 932
2 I:\cmo\Agreements\Matich Corporation Public Works Contract -PMP 2024 Street Resurfacing Project FY24-0027.docx-ms

7. RESOLUTION OF CONSTRUCTION CLAIMS: Claims by Contractor in the amount of three hundred seventy five thousand dollars ($375,000) or less shall be made by Contractor and processed by the City pursuant to the provisions of Part 3, Chapter 1, Article 1.5 of the Public Contract Code (commencing with Section 20104). All claims shall be in writing and include the documents necessary to substantiate the claim. Nothing in subdivision (a) of Public Contract Code Section 20104.2 shall extend the time limit or supersede the notice requirements provided in this case from filing claims by Contractor.

8. ELIGIBILITY OF CONTRACTOR/SUBCONTRACTOR: Contractor and all of its subcontractors shall abide by California Public Contract Code, Section 6109, and California Labor Code Sections 1777.1 and/or 1777.7, and certify that they are not debarred and are eligible to work on this project.

9. ASSIGNMENT OF AGREEMENT: No assignment by a Party of any rights or interests under this Contract shall be binding on another Party without the written consent of the Party sought to be bound.

10. SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS: City and Contractor each binds itself and their respective successors and assigns in respect to all covenants, agreements, and obligations contained in the Contract Documents.

11. SEVERABILITY: Any provision or part of the Contract Documents held to be void or unenforceable under any law or regulation shall be deemed stricken, and all remaining provisions shall continue to be valid and binding upon City and Contractor.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
541 of 932
3 I:\cmo\Agreements\Matich Corporation Public Works Contract -PMP 2024 Street Resurfacing Project FY24-0027.docx-ms

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have executed this Contract the day and year first written above.

CITY OF REDLANDS
(SEAL)

By:____________________________________
Eddie Tejeda, Mayor
ATTEST:

____________________________________
Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk
(SEAL)

______Matich Corporation____________________
Name of Contractor

By:_______________________________________
Signature of Authorized Agent

Jason G. Jones, Vice president__________________
Title

__________________________________________
Signature of Authorized Agent (if necessary)

__________________________________________
Title

__________________________________________
Contractor's License No.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
542 of 932
4 I:\cmo\Agreements\Matich Corporation Public Works Contract -PMP 2024 Street Resurfacing Project FY24-0027.docx-ms

WORKER'S COMPENSATION INSURANCE CERTIFICATION

Description of Contract: City of Redlands
Municipal Utilities and Engineering Department
PMP 2024 Street Resurfacing Project
Project No. 211010

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 insurers 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 Industria l 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 wit h 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.

Dated this day of , 2024.

Matich Corporation______________________
(Contractor)
_____________________________________
(Signature)
Jason G. Jones, Vice President_____________
(Official Title)

(SEAL)

(Labor Code Section 1861 provides that the above certificate must be signed and filed by the Contractor with the Owner prior to performing the work of the contract.)
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
543 of 932
5 I:\cmo\Agreements\Matich Corporation Public Works Contract -PMP 2024 Street Resurfacing Project FY24-0027.docx-ms

FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE BOND

Whereas, the City of Redlands (“City”), State of California, and Matich Corporation (hereinafter designated as "Principal") have entered into an agreement dated October 1 , 2024 (“Agreement”) whereby Principal agrees to install and complete certain public improvements (the “Work”), which said Agreement is identified as PMP 2024 Street Resurfacing Project, Project No. 211010 and is hereby referred to and made a part hereof; and

Whereas, said Principal is required under the terms of the Agreement to furnish a bond for the faithful performance of the Work, now, therefore, we, the Principal and , _____________________________, as Surety, are held and firmly bound unto the City in the penal sum of Four Million Six Hundred Seventy Seven Thousand Three Hundred Seventy Seven Dollars ($4,677,377) lawful money of the United States, for the payment of which sum we bind ourselves, and our heirs, successors, executors and administrators, jointly and severally, firmly by these presents.

The condition of this obligation is such that if the above bounded Principal, his or its heirs, executors, administrators, successors or assigns, shall in all things stand to and abide by, and well and truly keep and perform the covenants, conditions and provisions in the Agreement and any alteration thereof made as therein provided, on his or its part, to be kept and performed at the time and in the manner therein specified, and in all respects according to their true intent and meaning, and shall faithfully fulfi ll the one -year guarantee of all materials and workmanship, and shall defend, indemnify and save harmless the City and its elected officials, officers, agents and employees, as therein stipulated, then this obligation shall become null and void; otherwise it shall be and remain in full force and effect.

As a part of the obligation secured hereby and in addition to the face amount specified therefor, there shall be included costs and reasonable expenses and fees, including reasonable attorneys’ fees, incurred by the City in successfully enforcing such obligations, all to be taxed as costs and included in the judgment rendered.

As a condition precedent to the satisfactory completion of the Work, the above obligation shall hold good for a period of one (1) year or longer if required by the Agreement after the acceptance of the work by the City, during which time if the Principal shall fail to make full, complete, and satisfactory repair and repla cements and totally protect the City from loss or damage made e vident during this period from the date of completion of the Work, and resulting from or caused by defective materials or faulty workmanship, the above obligation in penal sum thereof shall remain in full force and effect. The obligations of Surety hereun der shall continue so long as any obligation of the Principal remains.

Whenever the Principal shall be, and is declared by the City to be, in default under the Agreement, the City having performed the City obligations thereunder, the Surety shall prompt ly remedy the default, or shall promptly, at the City’s option:

1. Complete the Work in accordance with its terms and conditions; or

2. Obtain a bid or bids for completing the Work in accordance with its terms and conditions, and upon determination by Surety of the lowest responsive and responsible bidder, arrange for a contract between such bidder and the City, and make available as work progresses sufficient funds to pay the cost of completion of the Work less the balance of the Agreement price, but not exceeding, including other costs and damages for which Surety may be liable hereunder, the Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
544 of 932
6 I:\cmo\Agreements\Matich Corporation Public Works Contract -PMP 2024 Street Resurfacing Project FY24-0027.docx-ms

amount set forth above. The term “balance of the Agreement price,” as used in this paragraph, shall mean the total amount payable to the Principal by the City under the Agreement and any modifications thereto, less the amount previously properly paid by the City to the Principal.

Surety expressly agrees that the City may reject any contractor or subcontractor which may be proposed by Surety in fulfillment of its obligations in the event of default by the Principal.

Surety shall not utilize the Principal in completing the Work nor shall Surety accept a bid from the Principal for completion of the Work if the City, when declaring the Principal in default, notifies Surety of the City’s objection to the Principal’s further participation in the completion of the Work.

No right of action shall accrue on the bond to or for the use of any person or corporation other than the City named herein or the successors or assigns of the City. Any suit under this bond must be instituted within the applicable statute of limitations period.

The said Surety, for value received, hereby stipulates and agrees that no change, extension of time, alteration or addition to the terms of the Agreement or to the work to be performed thereunder or the Specifications accompanying the same shall in any way affect its obligations on this bond, and it does hereby waive notice of any such change, extension of time, alteration or addition to the terms of the Agreement or to the work or to the specifications.

No final settlement between the City and the Principal shall abridge the right of any beneficiary hereunder whose claim may be unsatisfied.

The Principal and Surety agree that if the City is required to engage the services of any attorney in connection with the enforcement of this bond, each shall pay the City’ s reasonable attorneys’ fees incurred, with or without suit, in addition to the above sum.

In witness whereof, this instrument has been duly executed by the Principal and Surety above named, on , 2024.

(SEAL) (SEAL)

(Contractor) (Surety)
BY:
(Signature) (Signature)

Address:___________________________________
__________________________________________
(Seal and Notarial Acknowledgment of
Surety)
Telephone ( )___________________________

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
545 of 932
7 I:\cmo\Agreements\Matich Corporation Public Works Contract -PMP 2024 Street Resurfacing Project FY24-0027.docx-ms

LABOR AND MATERIAL BOND

Whereas, the City Council of the City of Redlands, State of California, and Matich Corporation (hereinafter designated as “Principal”) have entered into an agreement (the “Agreement”) whereby Principal agrees to install and complete certain designated public improvements (the “Work”), which said agreement, dated October 1, 2024, and identified as PMP 2024 Street Resurfacing Project, Project No. 211010 is hereby referred to and made a part hereof; and

Whereas, under the terms of the Agreement, Principal is required before commen cing the performance of the Work, to file a good and sufficient Labor and Material bond with the City of Redlands to secure the claims to which reference is made in Title 3 (commencing with Section 9550) of Part 6 of Division 4 of the Civil Code of the State of California.

Now, therefore, said Principal and the undersigned as corporate surety, are held firmly bound unto the City and all contractors, subcontractors, laborers, material men and other persons employed in the performance of the Agreement and referred to in the aforesaid Code of Civil Procedure in the sum of four million six hundred seventy seven thousand three hundred seventy seven dollars ($4,677,377) for materials furnished or labor thereon of any kind, or for amounts due under the Unemployment Insurance Act with respect to such work or labor, that said surety will pay the same in an amount not exceeding the amount hereinabove set forth, and also in case suit is brought upon this bond, will pay, in addition to the face amount thereof, costs and reasonable expenses and fees, including reasonable attorneys’ fees, incurred by the City in successfully enforcing such obligation, to be awarded and fixed by the court, and to be taxed as costs and to be inc luded in the judgment therein rendered.

It is hereby expressly stipulated and agreed that this bond shall insure to the benefit of any and all persons, companies and corporations entitled to file claims under Title 3 (commencing with Section 9550) of Part 6 of Division 4 of the Civil Code, so as to give a right of action to them or their assigns in any suit brought upon this bond.

Should the condition of this bond be fully performed, then this obligation shall become null and void, otherwise it shall be and remain in full force and effect.

The surety hereby stipulates and agrees that no change, extension of time, alteration or addition to the terms of the Agreement or the specifications accompanying the same shall in any manner affect its obligations on t his bond, and it does hereby waive notice of any such change, extension of time, alteration or addition.

In witness whereof, this instrument has been duly executed by the Principal and surety above named, on _______________________, 2024.

(SEAL) (SEAL)

(Contractor) (Surety)
BY:
(Signature) (Signature)
Address:_____________________________
(Seal and Notarial Acknowledgement of Surety) ____________________________________ Telephone: ( )___________________

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
546 of 932
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
547 of 932
PROJECT NO. 211010 BID DATE: 22-Aug-2024
PMP 2024 Street Resurfacing Project EST. START DATE: 7-Oct-2024 Unit Price Item Price Unit Price Item Price Unit Price Item Price 1 Mobilization (Maximum 5% of total bid price) 1 LS $233,000.29 $233,000.29 $280,000.00 $280,000.00 $315,000.00 $315,000.00 2 SWPPP 1 LS $8,900.00 $8,900.00 $115,000.00 $115,000.00 $15,000.00 $15,000.00 3 Survey 1 LS $45,000.00 $45,000.00 $100,000.00 $100,000.00 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 4 Crack Seal/Fill and Slurry Seal (Type II) 92,644 SY $2.73 $252,918.12 $3.00 $277,932.00 $3.30 $305,725.20 5 0.1' AC Grind and 0.1' AC Overlay 1,840 SY $11.50 $21,160.00 $33.00 $60,720.00 $29.00 $53,360.00 6 2" AC Grind and 2" AC Overlay 125,100 SY $12.80 $1,601,280.00 $17.30 $2,164,230.00 $18.00 $2,251,800.00 7 3.5" AC Grind and 3.5" AC Overlay 19,768 SY $22.70 $448,733.60 $32.00 $632,576.00 $32.00 $632,576.00 8 3" AC Remove and Replace 1,240 SY $42.60 $52,824.00 $59.00 $73,160.00 $58.00 $71,920.00 9 Pulverize top 9" to place 3" AC over 9" FDR-25 33,721 SY $5.70 $192,209.70 $6.40 $215,814.40 $7.00 $236,047.00 10 Asphalt Concrete 5,463 TON $97.00 $529,911.00 $110.00 $600,930.00 $130.00 $710,190.00 11 Leveling 2,000 TON $108.00 $216,000.00 $145.00 $290,000.00 $145.00 $290,000.00 12 R/R PCC Curb and Gutter 335 LF $143.00 $47,905.00 $160.00 $53,600.00 $150.00 $50,250.00 13 R/R Rock Curb and Gutter 1,370 LF $178.00 $243,860.00 $200.00 $274,000.00 $275.00 $376,750.00 14 Adjust Manhole w/ Concrete Collar 59 EA $1,770.00 $104,430.00 $1,600.00 $94,400.00 $1,765.00 $104,135.00 15 Adjust Valve Cover (Circular) 230 EA $123.00 $28,290.00 $900.00 $207,000.00 $235.00 $54,050.00 16 Replace Valve Can & Cover (Triangular) 10 EA $210.00 $2,100.00 $300.00 $3,000.00 $1,625.00 $16,250.00 17 Install Blue/yellow RPM 78 EA $8.00 $624.00 $8.00 $624.00 $9.00 $702.00 18 Replace Traffic Loops 28 EA $460.00 $12,880.00 $475.00 $13,300.00 $500.00 $14,000.00 19 STOP & Misc. Legend (Thermo) 156 EA $180.00 $28,080.00 $190.00 $29,640.00 $195.00 $30,420.00 20 24" Solid White/Yellow Stripe (Thermo) 297 LF $6.00 $1,782.00 $7.00 $2,079.00 $7.00 $2,079.00 21 12" Solid White/Yellow Stripe (Thermo) 4,143 LF $3.00 $12,429.00 $3.25 $13,464.75 $3.00 $12,429.00 22 8" Solid White Stripe (Thermo) 4,480 LF $1.00 $4,480.00 $1.05 $4,704.00 $1.00 $4,480.00 23 6" Double Yellow Stripe (Thermo) 16,864 LF $1.40 $23,609.60 $1.50 $25,296.00 $1.50 $25,296.00 24 6" Solid White Stripe (Thermo) 24,107 LF $0.71 $17,115.97 $0.75 $18,080.25 $0.75 $18,080.25 25 6" Skip White/Yellow Stripe (Thermo) 27,246 LF $0.71 $19,344.66 $0.75 $20,434.50 $0.75 $20,434.50 26 4" Solid White/Yellow Stripe (Thermo) 116 LF $0.66 $76.56 $0.75 $87.00 $0.70 $81.20 27 Centerline Rumble Strip 8,491 LF $3.50 $29,718.50 $3.75 $31,841.25 $3.75 $31,841.25 28 Two-way Left Turn 3,086 LF $2.50 $7,715.00 $2.70 $8,332.20 $2.70 $8,332.20 29 Export Roadway Material 2,000 CY $55.00 $110,000.00 $105.00 $210,000.00 $60.00 $120,000.00 30 Unforeseen work not covered in all other bid items 1 LS $200,000.00 $200,000.00 $200,000.00 $200,000.00 $200,000.00 $200,000.00 31 Demobilization 1 LS $181,000.00 $181,000.00 $25,000.00 $25,000.00 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 Last Minute Additions/Deductions $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
Total Bid Price
License Status
Sub's License Status
Bid Bond Company
Submitted Entire Bid Package
Submitted Sub's Qualification Statement
DIR Status
Error in Bid No Yes
Yes Yes Yes
Active ActiveActive
Yes

CITY OF REDLANDS

MUNICIPAL UTILITIES & ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT

BID ANALYSIS
Item
No.

All American AsphaltBid Item Matich CorporationQuantity Unit R.J. Noble Company YesYes
Active
Active
Active
Active
Yes
Liberty Mutual Insurance Western Surety Company
Active
Active
Fidelity and Deposit Co. of Maryland
$6,071,228.60$6,045,245.35$4,677,377.00
Multiplication error on Bid Item

6. Total is corrected per item
unit price
Multiplication error on Bid Item

6. Total is corrected per item
unit price
Sheet 1 of 1
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
548 of 932
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
549 of 932
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
550 of 932
210
10 10
10 PMP 2024 STREET RESURFACING PROJECT

CITY OF REDLANDS

CONSTRUCTION PLANS FOR
PROJECT No. 211010

VICINITY MAP

NTS NORTH
SHEET INDEX:

TITLE SHEET
2434-ST-01/10

MARIO SAUCEDO, COUNCIL MEMBER
CITY COUNCIL:

PAUL BARICH MAYOR PRO TEM
CITY STAFF:

CHARLES M. DUGGAN, JR., CITY MANAGER

JENNA GUZMAN-LOWERY, COUNCIL MEMBER

EDDIE TEJEDA, MAYOR

DENISE DAVIS, COUNCIL MEMBER
CITY CLERK:

JEANNE DONALDSON, CITY CLERK

BROOKSIDE AVE

OLIVE AVE

FERN AVE

PALM AVE

CYPRESS AVE

HIGHLAND AVE

HIGHLAND AVE

PALM AVE

CYPRESS AVE

OLIVE AVE

FERN AVE

CENTER ST

CENTER ST

CAJON ST

CAJON ST

REDLANDS BLVD

REDLANDS BLVD

REDLANDS BLVD

COLTON AVE

CHURCH ST

CHURCH ST

UNIVERSITY ST

JUDSON STJUDSON ST

DEARBORN ST

TEXAS ST

CITRUS AVECITRUS AVE

FORD ST
6TH ST

HIGH AVE

COLTON AVE

TEXAS ST

ORANGE ST

LUGONIA AVELUGONIA AVE

STATE ST

TERRACINA BLVD

SAN BERNARDINO AVESAN BERNARDINO AVE

PIONEER AVEPIONEER AVE

SUNSET DR

SUNSET DR

WABASH AVE

MARIPOSA DR

FORD ST

CALIFORNIA ST

NEVADA ST

ALABAMA ST

REDLANDS BLVD

PARK AVE

BARTON RD

ALABAMA ST ALABAMA ST

MOUNTAIN VIEW AVE

CITY OF REDLANDS
10 PROJECT NO. 211010
PMP 2024 STREET

RESURFACING PROJECT
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
551 of 932

PROJECT INDEX MAP
NTS

INDEX MAP
2434-ST-02/10

CITY OF REDLANDS
10 PROJECT NO. 211010
PMP 2024 STREET

RESURFACING PROJECT
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
552 of 932
STOP
AHEAD
SLOW
XING
SCHOOL
40 45
SIGNAL

GENERAL NOTES (STRIPING & MARKINGS)

1. ALL STRIPING AND PAVEMENT MARKINGS SHALL BE IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE CURRENT

EDITION OF THE TRAFFIC MANUAL PUBLISHED BY THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION.

2. ALL EXISTING SIGNING, STRIPING, AND PAVEMENT MARKINGS NOT SHOWN ON THE PLANS, IF

REMOVED/OBLITERATED, SHALL BE REPLACED/RESTORED OF SAME KIND, AND IN

CONFORMANCE WITH THE CURRENT EDITION OF THE TRAFFIC MANUAL PUBLISHED BY THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION.

3. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY THE CITY ENGINEER TO SCHEDULE CITY PERSONNEL FOR A

FINAL INSPECTION AND APPROVAL OF TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES PRIOR TO PROJECT ACCEPTANCE.

4. ALL CONSTRUCTION SIGNS SHALL BE BLACK ON ORANGE BACKGROUND WITH HIGH INTENSITY (FHWA TYPE III) REFLECTIVE SHEETING.

5. ALL CONSTRUCTION SIGNING SHALL BE IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE CURRENT EDITION OF THE

MANUAL OF TRAFFIC CONTROLS FOR CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE WORK ZONES PUBLISHED BY THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION.

6. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL AND MAINTAIN ALL TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES AND NECESSARY TO MAINTAIN PUBLIC SAFETY. ALL WORK WITHIN 6-FEET OF THE SHOULDER WILL REQUIRE CLOSURE OF THE SHOULDER. ALL WORK WITHIN 6-FEET OF THE TRAVELED WAY WILL REQUIRE CLOSURE OF THAT LANE.

7. ALL WORK SHALL CONFORM TO THE "STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR PUBLIC WORKS CONSTRUCTION (GREENBOOK)", 2021 EDITION, THE "STANDARD PLANS FOR PUBLIC WORKS CONSTRUCTION", 2021 EDITION, AND THE CITY OF REDLANDS STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS. ALL

WORK SHALL BE COMPLETED TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE MUNICIPAL UTILITIES & ENGINEERING DIRECTOR OR APPOINTED REPRESENTATIVE.

GENERAL NOTES (STREET)

1. ALL STRIPING AND PAVEMENT MARKINGS SHALL BE IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE CURRENT

EDITION OF THE TRAFFIC MANUAL, PUBLISHED BY THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION.

2. ALL EXISTING SIGNING, STRIPING, AND PAVEMENT MARKINGS, IF REMOVED/OBLITERATED,

SHALL BE REPLACED/RESTORED OF SAME KIND, AND IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE CURRENT

EDITION OF THE TRAFFIC MANUAL, PUBLISHED BY THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION.

3. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY THE CITY ENGINEER TO SCHEDULE CITY PERSONNEL FOR A

FINAL INSPECTION AND APPROVAL OF TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES PRIOR TO PROJECT ACCEPTANCE.

4. ALL CONSTRUCTION SIGNS SHALL BE BLACK ON ORANGE BACKGROUND WITH HIGH INTENSITY (FHWA TYPE III) REFLECTIVE SHEETING.

5. ALL CONSTRUCTION SIGNING SHALL BE IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE CURRENT EDITION OF THE MANUAL OF TRAFFIC CONTROLS FOR CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE WORK ZONES.

PUBLISHED BY THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION.

6. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL AND MAINTAIN ALL TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES AS NECESSARY FOR PUBLIC SAFETY. ALL WORK WITHIN 6-FEET OF THE SHOULDER WILL REQUIRE CLOSURE OF THE SHOULDER. ALL WORK WITHIN 6-FEET OF THE TRAVELED WAY WILL REQUIRE CLOSURE OF THAT LANE.

7. ALL CONFLICTING SIGNS SHALL BE REMOVED OR RELOCATED BY THE CONTRACTOR.

RELOCATABLE SIGNS SHALL BE INSTALLED AS SPECIFIED ON THE PLANS OR AS DETERMINED IN THE FIELD BY THE CITY ENGINEER.

8. ALL WORK SHALL CONFORM TO THE "STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR PUBLIC WORKS CONSTRUCTION (GREENBOOK)", 2021 EDITION, THE "STANDARD PLANS FOR PUBLIC WORKS CONSTRUCTION", 2021 EDITION, AND THE CITY OF REDLANDS STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS. ALL

WORK SHALL BE COMPLETED TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE MUNICIPAL UTILITIES & ENGINEERING DIRECTOR OR APPOINTED REPRESENTATIVE.

9. IF ANY DAMAGE OCCURS AS A RESULT OF THIS PROJECT, THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE TO REPAIR AT HIS EXPENSES.

10. EXISTING STRIPING SHALL BE REMOVED AND REPLACED AS NECESSARY. NEW STRIPING AND

PAVEMENT MARKINGS SHALL BE INSTALLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE STRIPING PLANS

APPROVED BY THE MUNICIPAL UTILITIES & ENGINEERING DIRECTOR OR APPOINTED REPRESENTATIVE.

11. SECTION 4216/4217 OF THE GOVERNMENT CODE REQUIRES A DIG ALERT IDENTIFICATION NUMBER BE ISSUED BEFORE THE "ENCROACHMENT PERMIT" WILL BE VALID. FOR YOUR DIG ALERT ID NUMBER, CALL UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT (TOLL FREE) AT 1-800-227-2600, TWO WORKING DAYS BEFORE YOU DIG.

12. PRIOR TO ROAD CONSTRUCTION, SURVEY MONUMENTS SHALL BE REFERENCED OUT AND CORNER RECORDS FILED WITH THE COUNTY SURVEYOR. SURVEY POINTS DESTROYED DURING

CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE RESET, AND A SECOND CORNER RECORD FILED FOR THOSE POINTS PRIOR TO COMPLETION AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE PROJECT.

13. USE BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (BMP) TO PREVENT AND CONTAIN ANY ILLEGAL DISCHARGES IN ACCORDANCE WITH CHAPTER 13.54 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE AND THE TERMS OF NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM (NPDES) PROGRAM. THIS IS TO

REMAIN IN EFFECT FOR THE ENTIRE DURATION OF PROJECT CONSTRUCTION TO ITS COMPLETION AND ACCEPTANCE BY CITY.

14. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT A TRAFFIC CONTROL/DETOUR PLAN TO THE ENGINEER FOR APPROVAL. ALL APPROVED CONSTRUCTION SIGNAGE SHALL BE IN PLACE PRIOR TO THE START OF WORK.

15. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MAKE HIS OWN DETERMINATION OF QUANTITIES BEFORE SUBMITTING HIS BID. ANY ITEM OR WORK REQUIRED BY THESE PLANS WHICH IS NOT SPECIFICALLY LISTED IN THE ESTIMATE OF QUANTITIES SHALL BE CONSIDERED AS INCLUDED IN THE ITEMS OF WORK.

16. IT SHALL BE THE CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITY TO PROVIDE ACCURATE "RECORD" DRAWINGS TO THE CITY UPON COMPLETION OF CONSTRUCTION.

17. RESURFACING WORK WITHIN TEN FEET OF ANY RAILROAD X-ING, BRIDGE AND/OR SHALLOW (1-1/2' OR LESS COVER) UNDERGROUND STRUCTURES SHALL BE GRIND & OVERLAY OPERATION INSTEAD OF PULVERIZATION (IF SPECIFIED). THICKNESS OF AC LAYER SHALL BE AS SPECIFIED IN THE PLAN.

18. ALL DELINEATORS, SIGNS, TRAFFIC CONES SHALL BE IN NEW CONDITION.

19. ALL UTILITY LINES, INCLUDING IRRIGATION AND STORM DRAIN LINES SHOWN ARE APPROXIMATE AND INTENDED FOR REFERENCE ONLY. CONTRACTOR TO POTHOLE ALL EXISTING UTILITIES PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION AND NOTIFY THE ENGINEER IMMEDIATELY IF CONFLICTS ARISE. NO

ADDITIONAL COMPENSATION WILL BE ALLOWED FOR UTILITY CONFLICTS IF NOT FIELD LOCATED PRIOR TO START OF CONSTRUCTION.

20. THE EXISTENCE AND APPROXIMATE LOCATIONS OF ANY UNDERGROUND UTILITIES OR

STRUCTURES SHOWN ON THESE PLANS ARE OBTAINED BY A SEARCH OF THE AVAILABLE RECORDS. THE CIVIL ENGINEER ASSUMES NO LIABILITY AS TO THE EXACT LOCATION OF SAID LINES NOR FOR UTILITY OR IRRIGATION LINES WHOSE LOCATIONS ARE NOT SHOWN. THE

CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR NOTIFYING ALL UTILITY AND IRRIGATION

COMPANIES PRIOR TO WORK OR EXCAVATION TO DETERMINE THE EXACT LOCATIONS OF ALL

LINES AFFECTING THIS WORK, WHETHER OR NOT SHOWN HEREON, AND FOR ANY DAMAGE OR PROTECTION TO THESE PLANS.

SPECIAL NOTES

1. SEWER AND SD MANHOLE, WATER GATE VALVE BOX AND COVER IN THE SLURRY SEAL PORTION OF THE ROADWAY MAY NOT REQUIRE FIELD ADJUSTMENTS BUT MAY REQUIRE CLEAN UP.

2. APPROXIMATE LOCATION FOR DRIVEWAY APPROACH, X-GUTTER AND ADA RAMP ARE SHOWN ON PLAN. THE EXACT LOCATION WILL BE VERIFIED IN THE FIELD.

3. CONTRACTOR SHALL INCLUDE COMPENSATION FOR INSTALLATION AND RELOCATION OF INFORMATION SIGNS IN THE MOBILIZATION ITEM AS NECESSARY.

4. DURING PULVERIZATION IF MACADAM IS DISCOVERED IN THE ROAD, RESURFACING METHOD SHALL BE CHANGED TO GRIND & OVERLAY WITH THE APPROVAL OF CITY STAFF. PAYMENT

SHALL BE MADE PER BID UNIT COST OF THE METHOD CHANGED TO BUT NO ADDITIONAL

MONETARY COMPENSATION WILL BE ALLOWED FOR DELAY IN PAVING AND/OR PRODUCTION LOSS.

5. REPAIR AND REPLACE 2' OF AC GUTTER PAN ALONG EXISTING AC DIKE LOCATIONS.

NOTES AND DETAILS
2434-ST-03/10

TYPICAL STREET SECTION
SCALE: 1" = 5'
NOTE:

1. EXISTING CROSS SLOPE VARIES FROM 1% TO 10%. AS A RESULT, EVERY FDR-25/FDR-200 STREET REQUIRES EXPORT IN ORDER TO ACHIEVE 3% MAX. CROSS SLOPE.

2. CROSS SLOPE SHALL BE 2% MINIMUM AND SHALL NOT EXCEED 3%.

3. CROWN ELEVATION MUST BE AT LEAST 1.5" BELOW TOP OF CURB ELEVATION.

4. WHERE OFFSET CURB IS PRESENT, THE CROWN ELEVATION MUST BE AT LEAST 1.5" BELOW TOP OF CURB ELEVATION OF THE HIGHER SIDE OF THE STREET.

5. WHERE OFFSET CURB IS PRESENT, CROSS SLOPE OF THE HIGHER SIDE SHALL BE 1% MINIMUM.

6. ANY DEVIATION FROM THE ABOVE REQUIREMENTS SHALL BE APPROVED BY THE CITY STAFF.

7. STREET WITH NO CURB & GUTTER OR NO AC BERM, CONSTRUCT 2-FT SHOULDER AREA WITH EXCESSIVE ROADWAY MATERIAL
WHERE FEASIBLE AND MATCH EXISTING GRADE/SLOPE. 90%
COMPACTION SHALL BE ACHIEVED WITHIN SHOULDER AREA.

8. CONTRACTOR SHALL IDENTIFY THESE AREA WHERE TO BUILD
SHOULDER DURING CONSTRUCTION.

TYPICAL STRIPING AT INTERSECTION

NOT TO SCALE
STOP

WATER VALVE CAN DETAIL
SCALE: N.T.S.

1. SEWER INSTALLATION IS TO BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THESE PLANS AND THE STANDARD

SPECIFICATIONS AND DETAIL DRAWINGS OF THE CITY OF REDLANDS LATEST REVISION THEREOF. IF ANY CONFLICTS ARISE SEE SECTION 2-5.2 OF THE GENERAL CONDITIONS.

2. ALL SEWER PIPE ELEVATIONS GIVEN REFER TO THE FLOWLINE INVERT ELEVATIONS.

3. PVC SEWER IS NOT PERMITTED ON ANY HORIZONTAL OR VERTICAL CURVE AND MUST BE LAID STRAIGHT BETWEEN STRUCTURES.

4. SEWER LATERALS SHALL BE CLEARLY MARKED WITH A 3-INCH TALL "S" CHISELED OR STAMPED IN THE CURB FACE.

5. REQUIRED SEPARATION OF THE WATER AND SEWER MAINS AND LATERALS SHALL BE STRICTLY ADHERED TO. INSTALLATION SHALL COMPLY WITH THE STATE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH REGULATIONS AND THE DETAIL PROVIDED ON THIS SHEET.

6. SEWER LATERAL LOCATIONS SHALL NOT BE CHANGED MORE THAN 3 FEET (HORIZONTAL) WITHOUT AUTHORIZATION FROM THE CITY.

7. A MANDREL TEST SHALL BE PERFORMED BY THE CONTRACTOR IN THE PRESENCE OF THE CITY

INSPECTOR IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CITY OF REDLANDS SANITARY SEWER SYSTEMS STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS. THE MANDREL, SHALL BE SUPPLIED BY THE CONTRACTOR, APPROVED BY THE CITY OF REDLANDS AND SHALL BE PULLED THROUGH THE PIPE BY HAND.

8. PRIOR TO PAVING OF STREETS OVER A NEW SEWER MAIN, ALL COMPACTION TESTS, AIR TESTS,

MANDREL TESTS SHALL BE COMPLETED AND APPROVED BY THE CITY AND A COMPLETE SET OF AS-BUILT DRAWINGS SUBMITTED TO THE MUNICIPAL UTILITIES AND ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT.

THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE PREPARATION OF THE AS-BUILT DRAWINGS.

9. MANHOLE RIM ELEVATIONS INDICATED HEREON ARE APPROXIMATE. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL

BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ADJUSTING ALL RIMS TO FINAL FINISH GRADE, IN COORDINATION WITH STREET IMPROVEMENTS.

10. CLEAN, HAUL, DISPOSE OF EXISTING PIPES, APPURTENANCES, MANHOLES PER SPECIFICATIONS. CONTRACTOR RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL APPLICABLE REGULATIONS AND WORKER SAFETY.

11. AFTER SEWER CONSTRUCTION IS SUBSTANTIALLY COMPLETE, BUT PRIOR TO FINAL APPROVAL,

CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE AN INTERNAL DIGITAL VIDEO RECORDING OF THE ENTIRE PIPE REACHES INSTALLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 500-1.1.5.

12. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROTECT ALL SURVEY MONUMENTS AND SHALL PAY ALL COSTS TO

RE-ESTABLISH ANY MONUMENTS DESTROYED OR DISTURBED DURING THE COURSE OF CONSTRUCTION. ALL WORK SHALL BE PERFORMED BY OR UNDER THE DIRECT SUPERVISION OF

A LICENSED PROFESSIONAL SURVEYOR IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA AND PER SPECIFICATIONS.

13. ALL STATIONING IS BASED ON THE CENTERLINE OF THE STREET, UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED.

14. THE PLANS WERE PREPARED USING DATA FROM THE CITY OF REDLANDS GIS DEPARTMENT, THEREFORE CENTERLINE AND PARCEL LINES ARE APPROXIMATE AND FOR REFERENCE ONLY.

THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ESTABLISH THE CENTERLINE OF ALL STREETS BY RECORD MAPS FOR ALL REQUIRED CONSTRUCTION STAKING. NO ADDITIONAL COMPENSATION WILL BE PROVIDED FOR ANY ADDITIONAL SURVEY RESEARCH OR INVESTIGATION TO COMPLETE STAKING.

15. IF SATURATED SOIL IS ENCOUNTERED DUE TO LEAKS IN THE EXISTING UTILITIES, THE

CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE SATURATED MATERIAL AND REPLACE WITH A SUITABLE BACKFILL

MATERIAL UNTIL ADEQUATE COMPACTION CAN BE ATTAINED BY VERIFICATION FROM THE CITY'S GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER. PRIOR TO ANY REMOVAL OF SATURATED MATERIAL, CONTRACTOR SHALL DISCUSS THE METHODS OF REMEDIATION WITH THE CITY'S REPRESENTATIVE.

APPROVAL FROM THE CITY, OR THE CITY'S REPRESENTATIVE, SHALL BE OBTAINED FOR ANY

AMOUNT OF SATURATED MATERIAL REMOVAL IN WHICH THE CONTRACTOR ANTICIPATES TO BE COMPENSATED FOR. IF APPROVAL IS NOT OBTAINED, ALL COSTS SHALL BE BORNE BY THE CONTRACTOR. UP TO A 14 DAY DELAY IN THE PAVING OPERATIONS MAY BE REQUESTED AFTER

ALL LEAKS HAVE BEEN RESOLVED TO PROVIDE TIME FOR EXCESS MOISTURE TO DISSIPATE, AT NO ADDITIONAL COST TO THE CITY. BASE OR AN APPROVED BACKFILL MATERIAL SHALL BE

INSTALLED WITHIN THE TRENCH TO THE EXISTING PAVEMENT SURFACE AND MAINTAINED BY THE CONTRACTOR THROUGHOUT THE DURATION OF REQUESTED DELAY. A NO COST CHANGE

ORDER WILL BE PREPARED TO PROVIDE THE CONTRACTOR WITH ADDITIONAL CONTRACT TIME IF SUCH DELAY IS REQUESTED BY THE CITY.

16. BACKFILL UNDER ALL WATERLINES, IRRIGATION LINES OR STORM DRAINS CROSSING THE NEW PIPE TRENCH TO WITHIN ONE FOOT OF THE EXPOSED LINE. BACKFILL THE REMAINDER OF THE TRENCH BENEATH THE LINE AND TO ITS SPRINGLINE, OR 12 INCHES ABOVE THE INVERT FOR STORM DRAIN CHANNELS, WITH 1-1/2 SACK CONCRETE SLURRY.

GENERAL NOTES (SEWER)

CITY OF REDLANDS
10 PROJECT NO. 211010
PMP 2024 STREET

RESURFACING PROJECT
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
553 of 932

QUANTITIES TABLE
2434-ST-04/10

CITY OF REDLANDS
10 PROJECT NO. 211010
PMP 2024 STREET

RESURFACING PROJECT
A
A
A
B
B
B
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
554 of 932

STOPSTOPSTOP
AHEAD
STOP
STOP

STOPSTOP

STOPSTOP
SIGNAL
AHEAD
SIGNAL
AHEAD

STOPSTOPSTOP
STOP

STOPSTOP

STOPSTOP
4040
SEGMENTS LAYOUT (001 - 005)

GRAPHIC SCALE
2434-ST-05/10
LEGEND

SEGMENT BOUNDARY (SHOWN WHERE

WATER VALVE COVER/BOX

MANHOLE RIM/COVER

REMOVE & REPLACE OR INSTALL PCC CURB & GUTTER

PAVEMENT RESURFACING IS CONTINUOUS)

REMOVE & REPLACE OR INSTALL AC DIKE/BERM

CRACK SEAL/FILL AND SLURRY SEAL TYPE II
2" AC GRIND & 2" AC OVERLAY

BLUE RPM FOR FIRE HYDRANTS

EXISTING STORM DRAIN SYSTEM

CITY OF REDLANDS
10 PROJECT NO. 211010
PMP 2024 STREET

RESURFACING PROJECT

CALIFORNIA ST
#001

CALIFORNIA ST
#002

CALIFORNIA ST
#003

PALMETTO AVE

PALMETTO AVE

PALMETTO AVEPIONEER AVE

PIONEER AVE

SAN BERNARDINO AVE

SAN BERNARDINO AVE

REDLANDS WASTEWATER

TREATMENT FACILITY
PARKING LOTS (2)

REDLANDS WASTEWATER

TREATMENT FACILITY

BRINE CAP
#004
#005
Parking Lot #1
Parking Lot #2

NEVADA ST

PALMETTO AVE

GRAPHIC SCALE

GRAPHIC SCALE

0.1' AC GRIND & 0.1' AC OVERLAY
·

·
·
·
·
·
BRINE CAP AS-BUILT DETAIL #1 (FOR REFERENCE ONLY)BRINE CAP AS-BUILT DETAIL #2 (FOR REFRENCE ONLY) A
A
A

3.6" AC GRIND & 3.6" AC OVERLAY
BB
B
B
B
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
555 of 932
SIGNAL
AHEAD
SIGNAL
AHEAD
SIGNAL
AHEAD
SIGNAL
AHEAD
SIGNAL
AHEAD
4040
4040

STOPSTOPSTOP

STOPSTOPSTOP

STOPSTOPSTOP
50'
SIGNAL
AHEAD
SIGNAL
AHEAD
STOP
45 STOPSTOPSTOP

STOPSTOPSTOP
50'
50'
100'
4545
SEGMENTS LAYOUT (006 - 011)

GRAPHIC SCALE
2434-ST-06/10

CITY OF REDLANDS
10 PROJECT NO. 211010
PMP 2024 STREET

RESURFACING PROJECT
#010

CALIFORNIA ST
#011

CALIFORNIA ST
#006

LUGONIA AVE

SAN BERNARDINO AVE

SAN BERNARDINO AVE

ALMOND AVE

ALMOND AVE

ALMOND AVE

ALMOND AVE

LUGONIA AVE

LUGONIA AVE

RESEARCH DR

BRYN MAWR AVE

MATCHLINE

SEE BELOW LEFT

MATCHLINE

SEE BELOW LEFT

MATCHLINE

SEE ABOVE RIGHT

MATCHLINE

SEE ABOVE RIGHT
#008

LUGONIA AVE

MATCHLINE

SEE ABOVE RIGHT

CALIFORNIA ST

CALIFORNIA ST

RESEARCH DR

LUGONIA AVE
#007

MATCHLINE

SEE BELOW LEFT

NEVADA ST

NEVADA ST

ALABAMA ST

ALABAMA ST

LUGONIA AVE

LUGONIA AVE
#009
#009 (CONT'D)
#008 (CONT'D)
#007 (CONT'D)
LEGEND

SEGMENT BOUNDARY (SHOWN WHERE

WATER VALVE COVER/BOX

MANHOLE RIM/COVER

REMOVE & REPLACE OR INSTALL PCC CURB & GUTTER

PAVEMENT RESURFACING IS CONTINUOUS)

REMOVE & REPLACE OR INSTALL AC DIKE/BERM
2" AC GRIND & 2" AC OVERLAY

BLUE RPM FOR FIRE HYDRANTS

EXISTING STORM DRAIN SYSTEM
B
B

3.6" AC GRIND & 3.6" AC OVERLAYB
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
556 of 932
STOP
STOP
STOP
STOP
STOP
STOP
STOP
KEEP

CLEARKEEP
CLEAR
STOP
KEEP

CLEARKEEP
CLEAR
KEEP
KEEP
AHEAD
CLEAR
CLEAR
KEEP
STOP
STOP
CLEAR
KEEP
CLEAR
STOP
AHEAD
SEGMENTS LAYOUT (012 - 033)

GRAPHIC SCALE
2434-ST-07/10

CITY OF REDLANDS
10 PROJECT NO. 211010
PMP 2024 STREET

RESURFACING PROJECT

RIVERVIEW DRCRYSTAL

SPRINGS LN
#012

PIONEER AVE

RIVERVIEW DR

RIVERVIEW DR

DEODAR ST

DOMESTIC AVE

FURLOW DR

COLORADO ST

FURLOW DR

BLUE JAY LN

BLUE BIRD LN

BRYN MAWR AVE

IOWA STIOWA ST

PIONEER AVE

LUGONIA AVE

LUGONIA AVE

HOWARD PL

CITRUS AVE

CITRUS AVE

PARK AVE

PARK AVE

CRYSTAL

SPRINGS LN

CRYSTAL COVE CT

CASTLEGATE LN

TEXAS ST
#013
#014
#015
#023
#019
#021
#027
#030#031
#016#017
#020
#024
#022
#025#026
#029
#033
#032
#018

TEXAS ST
#028

CRYSTAL SPRINGS LN DOMESTIC AVE

DOMESTIC AVE

PIONEER AVE
LEGEND

SEGMENT BOUNDARY (SHOWN WHERE

WATER VALVE COVER/BOX

MANHOLE RIM/COVER

REMOVE & REPLACE OR INSTALL PCC CURB & GUTTER

PAVEMENT RESURFACING IS CONTINUOUS)

REMOVE & REPLACE OR INSTALL AC DIKE/BERM

CRACK SEAL/FILL AND SLURRY SEAL TYPE II
2" AC GRIND & 2" AC OVERLAY

BLUE RPM FOR FIRE HYDRANTS

EXISTING STORM DRAIN SYSTEM
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
557 of 932
12'
50'
12' 14'
100'
STOP

STOPSTOPSTOP
STOP
STOP
STOP
12'
12'
12'
12'
12' 12'
100'100'
14'
14'
STOP
STOP

STOP STOP STOP
STOP
AHEAD
STOP
AHEAD

STOPSTOP

STOPSTOP
30'
STOP

STOPSTOP
STOP
STOP
AHEAD
STOP
AHEAD

XINGXING

SCHOOLSCHOOL

SLOWSLOW

XINGXING

SCHOOLSCHOOL

SLOWSLOW
XING
SCHOOL
SLOW

STOPSTOP

STOPSTOP
SEGMENTS LAYOUT (034 - 046)

GRAPHIC SCALE
2434-ST-08/10

CITY OF REDLANDS
10 PROJECT NO. 211010
PMP 2024 STREET

RESURFACING PROJECT
#034

VERONA DR

PIONEER AVE

TIVOLI DR

SONATA DR

CANTANIA AVE TIVOLI DR

WABASH AVE WABASH AVE

WABASH AVE

WABASH AVE

GARNET ST

AMETHYST ST

GREENSPOT RD

SONATA DR
#035
#040
#036
#041
#042
#043
#044
#045
#046

MILL CREEK RD

MILL CREEK RD

PIONEER AVE

CAPRI AVE

CAPRI AVE

INDEPENDENCE AVE

INDEPENDENCE AVE

MENTONE BLVD

MENTONE BLVD

INDEPENDENCE AVE

INDEPENDENCE AVE

CITRUS AVE

CITRUS AVE

COLTON AVE

COLTON AVE

SAN BERNARDINO AVE

SAN BERNARDINO AVE

VALLEY FALLS AVE
#037
#038
#039
LEGEND

SEGMENT BOUNDARY (SHOWN WHERE

WATER VALVE COVER/BOX

MANHOLE RIM/COVER

REMOVE & REPLACE OR INSTALL PCC CURB & GUTTER

PAVEMENT RESURFACING IS CONTINUOUS)

REMOVE & REPLACE OR INSTALL AC DIKE/BERM

CRACK SEAL/FILL AND SLURRY SEAL TYPE II
PULVERIZE 9" & PLACE 3" AC OVER FDR-25
2" AC GRIND & 2" AC OVERLAY

BLUE RPM FOR FIRE HYDRANTS

EXISTING STORM DRAIN SYSTEM
3" AC REMOVE AND REPLACE
NOTE: NO MATERIALS SHALL BE
EXPORTED FROM GREENSPOT RD. ALL
MATERIALS SHALL BE USED ON SITE.

MILL CREEK RD

MILL CREEK RD
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
558 of 932
STOP
SEGMENTS LAYOUT (047 - 062)

GRAPHIC SCALE
2434-ST-09/10

CITY OF REDLANDS
10 PROJECT NO. 211010
PMP 2024 STREET

RESURFACING PROJECT

SUTHERLAND DR

SOUTH LN

AVENUE N

SILVERLEAF CT

ASHFORTH DR

ASHFORTH DR

ASHFORTH DR
#047
#048
#049
#053
#050
#051
#052

BEDFORD DR

CONN WAY

KNOLL RD

ELIZABETH ST

ELIZABETH ST
#055

FOUNTAIN AVE
#054

FOUNTAIN AVE
#056

FOUNTAIN AVE
#057

FOUNTAIN AVE

FOUNTAIN PL

PROSPECT DR

CAJON ST

CAJON ST

SOUTH AVE
#058
#059
#060
#061
#062
LEGEND

SEGMENT BOUNDARY (SHOWN WHERE

WATER VALVE COVER/BOX

MANHOLE RIM/COVER

REMOVE & REPLACE OR INSTALL PCC CURB & GUTTER

PAVEMENT RESURFACING IS CONTINUOUS)

REMOVE & REPLACE OR INSTALL AC DIKE/BERM

CRACK SEAL/FILL AND SLURRY SEAL TYPE II
2" AC GRIND & 2" AC OVERLAY

BLUE RPM FOR FIRE HYDRANTS

EXISTING STORM DRAIN SYSTEM
3" AC REMOVE AND REPLACE
A
A
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
559 of 932
SEGMENTS LAYOUT (063)

GRAPHIC SCALE
2434-ST-10/10

CITY OF REDLANDS
10 PROJECT NO. 211010
PMP 2024 STREET

RESURFACING PROJECT
NOTE: NO MATERIALS SHALL BE
EXPORTED FROM LIVE CANYON RD. ALL
MATERIALS SHALL BE USED ON SITE.

MARGARITA DR

MATCHLINE

SEE BELOW LEFT

LIVE OAK CANYON RD

MATCHLINESEE BELOW LEFT

MATCHLINESEE ABOVE RIGHT

LIVE OAK CANYON RD
#063
#063
LEGEND

SEGMENT BOUNDARY (SHOWN WHERE

WATER VALVE COVER/BOX

MANHOLE RIM/COVER

REMOVE & REPLACE OR INSTALL PCC CURB & GUTTER

REMOVE & REPLACE OR INSTALL ROCK CURB & GUTTER

PAVEMENT RESURFACING IS CONTINUOUS)

REMOVE & REPLACE OR INSTALL AC DIKE/BERM

BLUE RPM FOR FIRE HYDRANTS

EXISTING STORM DRAIN SYSTEM
PULVERIZE 9" & PLACE 3" AC OVER FDR-25

MATCHLINE

SEE ABOVE RIGHT

LIVE OAK CANYON RD
#063
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
560 of 932

CITY OF REDLANDS

MUNICIPAL UTILITIES &

ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT

Bid Proposal, Contract Documents and Specifications

For

PMP 2024 STREET RESURFACING PROJECT
PROJECT No. 211010

JULY 2024
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
561 of 932

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
562 of 932

CITY OF REDLANDS

MUNICIPAL UTILITIES & ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT

Bid Proposal, Contract Documents and Specifications

for

PMP 2024 STREET RESURFACING PROJECT
PROJECT No. 211010

For use in conjunction with specifications entitled: “Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction (Greenbook)” 2021 Edition; “Standard Plans for Public Works Construction” 20 21 Edition; Municipal Utilities and Engineering Department’s Water Systems Standard Specifications and Sanitary Sewer System Standard Specifications, latest editions; and General Permit Conditions and Trench Specifications.

City Council:

Eddie Tejeda, Mayor
Paul T. Barich, Mayor Pro Tem
Denise Davis, Councilmember
Jenna Guzman-Lowery, Councilmember
Mario Saucedo, Councilmember

City Clerk:

Jeanne Donaldson, City Clerk

City Staff:

Charles M. Duggan Jr., City Manager

JULY 2024

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
563 of 932

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
564 of 932

TOC 2
PMP 2024 STREET RESURFACING PROJECT
PROJECT No. 211010

TABLE OF CONTENTS
(XX) REFLECTS PAGE IDENTIFICATION FOOTER ABBREVIATION

NOTICE INVITING SEALED PROPOSALS (NIB)

BID DOCUMENTS (BD)
INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDERS .......................................................................................... 1 PROPOSAL ...................................................................................................................... 10 BID CERTIFICATION ........................................................................................................ 15 BID BOND ...................................................................................................................... 16 NON-COLLUSION AFFIDAVIT ...................................................................................... 17 STATEMENT BY BIDDER ............................................................................................... 18 OFFICERS OF CORPORATION (Members of Firm) ....................................................... 18 SUB-CONTRACTORS LIST ............................................................................................. 19 QUALIFICATION AND EXPERIENCE STATEMENT .................................................. 20 GENERAL INFORMATION ............................................................................................. 21

CONTRACT DOCUMENTS (CD)
PUBLIC WORKS CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT ........................................................... 2

GENERAL CONDITIONS (GC)
SECTION 1 – GENERAL, TERMS, DEFINITIONS, ABBREVIATIONS, UNITS OF MEASURE, AND SYMBOLS ...................................................................... 1 SECTION 2 - SCOPE OF THE WORK ............................................................................... 2 SECTION 3 - CONTROL OF THE WORK ......................................................................... 3 SECTION 4 - CONTROL OF MATERIALS ....................................................................... 7 SECTION 5 – LEGAL RELATIONS AND RESPONSIBILITES ...................................... 8 SECTION 6 – PROSECUTION AND PROGRESS OF THE WORK .............................. 30 SECTION 7 - MEASUREMENT AND PAYMENT ......................................................... 32 SECTION 8 - FACILITIES FOR AGENCY PERSONNEL .............................................. 33 SECTION 9 - ASSIGNMENT OF UNFAIR BUSINESS PRACTICES CLAIMS ........... 33 SECTION 10 - TRENCHING AND EXCAVATION ........................................................ 33 SECTION 11 - REMOVAL, RELOCATION OR PROTECTION OF EXISTING UTILITIES ................................................................................................... 34 SECTION 200 - ROCK MATERIALS ............................................................................... 35 SECTION 201 - CONCRETE, MORTAR AND RELATED MATERIALS ..................... 36 SECTION 203 - BITUMINOUS MATERIALS ................................................................. 36 SECTION 206 - MISCELLANEOUS METAL ITEMS ..................................................... 37 Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
565 of 932

TOC 3
SECTION 207 – GRAVITY PIPE ...................................................................................... 38 SECTION 211 - MATERIAL TESTS ................................................................................ 38 SECTION 214 - TRAFFIC STRIPING, CURB AND PAVEMENT MARKINGS, AND PAVEMENT MARKERS ........................................................................... 38 SECTION 300 - EARTHWORK ........................................................................................ 39 SECTION 301 - TREATED SOIL, SUBGRADE PREPARATION AND PLACEMENT OF BASE MATERIALS ............................................................................. 43 SECTION 302 - ROADWAY SURFACING ..................................................................... 48 SECTION 303 - CONCRETE AND MASONRY CONSTRUCTION .............................. 58 SECTION 304 - METAL FABRICATION AND CONSTRUCTION .............................. 62 SECTION 314 - TRAFFIC STRIPING, CURB AND PAVEMENT MARKINGS, AND PAVEMENT MARKERS ........................................................................... 62

GENERAL REQUIREMENTS
SECTION 01110 COORDINATION OF WORK
SECTION 01112 DESCRIPTION OF WORK
SECTION 01200 MEASUREMENT AND PAYMENT
SECTION 01251 CHANGE ORDER REQUESTS
SECTION 01254 CHANGE ORDERS
SECTION 01298 SCHEDULE OF VALUES
SECTION 01321 CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE
SECTION 01322 CONSTRUCTION PROGRESS PHOTOGRAPHY
SECTION 01323 CONSTRUCTION STATUS REPORTS
SECTION 01330 SUBMITTALS
SECTION 01571 STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN
SECTION 01581 CONSTRUCTION INFORMATION SIGNS
SECTION 01721 MOBILIZATION
SECTION 01722 SURVEYING
SECTION 01732 POTHOLING
SECTION 01740 DEMOBILIZATION

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS
SECTION 02222 PROTECTING EXISTING UNDERGROUND UTILITIES

STREETBOND CL STREETBONDCL COATING APPLICATION TO NON-TEXTURED

ASPHALT PAVEMENT SPECIFICATION

APPENDIX

APPENDIX A CHECKLIST OF LABOR LAW REQUIREMENTS

APPENDIX B CITY OF REDLANDS WORKDAY CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
566 of 932

TOC 4

APPENDIX C STANDARD DRAWINGS

APPENDIX D PERMITS

APPENDIX E TRASH COLLECTION SCHEDULE

APPENDIX F SCHOOL CALENDAR

APPENDIX G CITY OF REDLANDS CONTRACTOR SAFETY PROGRAM

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
567 of 932

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
568 of 932
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
569 of 932
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
570 of 932

BID DOCUMENTS
(BD)
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
571 of 932

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
572 of 932

BD 1R

INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDERS
For
PMP 2024 STREET RESURFACING PROJECT
PROJECT No. 211010

Bids to receive consideration shall be made in accordance with the following instructions:

1. PROPOSALS:

a. Bids shall be made upon the form of proposal furnished by the City. All Bids shall be properly executed with all items filled in; the signatures of all persons signing shall be in longhand. If the unit price and the total amount named by a Bidder for any item are not in agreement, the unit price shall be considered as representing the Bidder's intention, and the totals may be corrected by the Engineer to conform thereto. If the sum of the individual bid item’s and the total amount named by a Bidder are not in agreement, the sum of the bid item’s shall be considered as representing the Bidder’s intention, and the totals may be corrected by the Engineer to conform thereto. If the total price written in words and the total price written in figures are not in agreement, then the total price written in words will be considered as representing the Bidder’s intention, and the totals will be corrected by the Engineer to conform thereto.

b. Proposals may be rejected if they show any alterations of form, additions not called for, conditional or alternative bids, incomplete Bids, erasures, or irregularities of any kind.

Mistakes shall be lined through and the correct amount written above and i nitialed by the authorized agent of the Bidder.

c. Bids shall be accompanied by a cashier's or a certified check or Bidder's admitted corporate surety bond, in an amount not less tha n ten percent (10%) of the bid, made payable to the City of Redlands. Said check or bond shall be given as a guarantee that the Bidder will enter into a contract if awarded the work. In the case of refusal or failure to enter into said Contract, within fourteen (14) days after Notice of Award by the City in writing, the security shall be applied by the City to the differen ce between such bid and next lowest acceptable bid and surplus, if any, shall be returned to Bidder if cash or check is used, or to Surety if bid bond is used.

d. Before submitting a bid, Bidders shall carefully examine the Plans; read the Specifications; read all other Contract documents; shall visit the site of the work; shall fully inform themselves as to all existing conditions and limitations; and include in the bid a sum to cover the cost of all items included in the Contract. No allowance will be made due to lack of examination or knowledge. The submission of a bid shall be conclusive evidence that the bidder has investigated and is satisfied as to the conditions to be encountered as to character, quality and scope of work to be performed; the quantities of materials to be furnished; and as to the requirements of the Bid Proposal, plans and specifications.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
573 of 932

BD 2R
e. Pursuant to CA Labor Code Section 1770 et seq., the successful bidder shall pay not less than the prevailing rate of per diem wages as determined by the Director of the California Department of Industrial Relations. Copies of such prevailing rate of per diem wages are available at http://www.dir.ca.gov/OPRL /PWD/. Copies of the prevailing wage determination are also on file at the City of Redlands and shall be made available to any interested party upon request.

f. The bid must be submitted on or before the date and time specified in the Notice Inviting Sealed Proposals (Bids). The bid shall be submitted in a sealed envelope marked in the lower left corner as follows:

BID FOR: PMP 2024 STREET RESURFACING
PROJECT, PROJECT No. 211010

g. Bids will be opened and publicly read aloud at the time set in the Notice Inviting Sealed Proposals (Bids), in the Office of the City Clerk, Civic Center, 35 Cajon Street, Suite 4, Redlands, California.

2. AGREEMENT AND BONDS:

The form of Contract which the successful Bidder, as Contractor, will be required to execute is included in the Contract Documents (CD) of these specifications and should be carefully examined by the Bidder. The Agreement, admitted Corporate Surety Bonds and other documents to be executed by the Contractor shall be executed in original-duplicates stamped according to law, one of which original -duplicates shall be filed with the City Clerk of the City of Redlands. The successful Bidder, simultaneously wit h the execution of the Agreement, will be required to furnish a faithful performance bond and a labor and material bond, each in an amount equal to one hundred percent (100%) of the Contract price. Said bonds shall provide that if the Contractor or their Subcontractor fails to pay for any materials, provision, provender or other supplies or items used in, upon, for or about the performance of the work contracted to be done, or for any work of labor thereon of any kind, or for amounts due under the Unemploy ment Insurance Act or Workman's Compensation, with respect to such work or labor, that the surety or sureties will pay for the same. The amount shall not exceed the sum specified in the bond, and also, in case suit is brought upon the bond, a reasonable attorney's fee to be fixed by the court. All bonds shall be secured from surety companies satisfactory to the City of Redlands and whose name is on file with the County Clerk of San Bernardino County, as an approved and financially sound surety company authorized to transact business in this state.

3. WITHDRAWAL OF BIDS:

a. Any Bidder may withdraw his Bid, only by written request, at any time prior to the scheduled time for Bid Opening.

b. No Bidder may withdraw his Bid for a period of sixty (60) days after the time of Bid Opening except as allowed by the California Public Contract Code.

Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
574 of 932

BD 3R

4. INSURANCE AND HOLD HARMLESS REQUIREMENTS:

Before entering into a Contract, the Bidder to whom the Contract has been awarded shall furnish satisfactory evidence that they have secured all required insurance from a responsible insurance company authorized to do business in California and satisfactory to the City, and such insurance shall be maintained in full force and effect at the Contractor's own expense during the life of the Contract. Contractor shall furnish the City with the customary Certificates of Insurance for all required insurance listed below. General Liability Insurance shall name the City and the Consultant, as an additional insured and shall be primary and non-contributing to any insurance or self -insurance maintained by the City. All liability insurance policies shall bear an endorsement or shall have attached a rider whereby it is provided that, in the event of expiration or proposed cancellation of such policies for any reason whatsoever, the City shall be notified by registered mail, return receipt requested, giving sufficient time before the date thereof to comply with any applicable law or statute, but in no event less than forty five (45) days before expiration or cancellation is effective.

The coverage shall provide the following minimum limits based on the type of work proposed under this Contract. The Contractor shall determine if the proposed work requires Tier 1 or Tier 2 Insurance Requirements as follows:

CONTRACTED OPERATIONS DESIGNATED AS TIER 1
Air Conditioning (HVAC)
Systems (installation)
Electric Light or Power Line
Construction Pipeline Construction
Airport Runways (paving,
repaving, etc.) Elevator Work Roofing
Blasting Operations Excavation Sandblasting
Bridge or Elevated Highway
Construction
Fire Suppression Systems
(installation)
Sewer and Water Main
Construction
Buildings Structural Work
(including elevators)
Gas Mains or Connections
Construction Sign Erection (streets)
Building Structure (raising or
moving) Geophysical Exploration Solar Energy
Cable Installation in Conduits
and Conduit Construction
(streets)
Grading of Land Street Cleaning
Caisson or Cofferdam Work Hazardous Materials
Contractors Street or Road Construction
Dam or Reservoir Construction Irrigation or Drainage
Construction
Tank Construction, Installation,
Erection or Repair
Demolition (structures) Landscape Construction (street
or street medians)
Telephone or Cable Line
Construction
Drilling Painting (exterior greater than
single story)
Tree Pruning, Dusting,
Spraying or Removal
Redlands Regular Meeting of 10/01/24
575 of 932

BD 4R
TIER 1 DESIGNATED INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS
a. Commercial General Liability
➢ $1 Million Per Occurrence/ $2 Million Aggregate
▪ City listed as an Additional Insured on the coverage
▪ Coverage is primary and non-contributory
▪ If scope of work is within 50 feet of any railroad, endorsement citing inclusion of liability associated with this work is required
▪ If any policy forms of endorsements are cited to grant extension of coverage, they must be included with the Certificate of Insurance submission

b. Business Auto Liability
➢ $1 Million Combined Single Limit
▪ City listed as an Additional Insured on the coverage
▪ Must include liability arising from all owned, leased, hired, and non-owned autos ▪ If any policy forms of endorsements are cited to grant extension of coverage, they must be included with the Certificate of Insurance submission ➢ If Contractor or its subcontractors or suppliers haul hazardous material (including, without limitation, waste), Auto Liability insurance must be applicable to all hazardous waste hauling vehicles, and include MCS 90 and CA9948 Endorsements.

c. Commercial Umbrella/ Excess Liability
➢ $5 Million Per Occurrence/ Aggregate
▪ City listed as an Additional Insured on the coverage
▪ Coverage is primary and non-contributory
▪ If any policy forms of endorsements are cited to grant extension of coverage, they must be included with the Certificate of Insurance submission