HomeMy WebLinkAbout120198AMcc_CCv0001.pdf MINUTES of an adjourned regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Redlands
held in the Council Chambers, Civic Center, 35 Cajon Street, on December 1,
1998, at 9:00 A.M.
PRESENT William E. Cunningham, Mayor
Geni A. S. Banda, Mayor Pro Tem
Pat Gilbreath, Councilmember
John L. Freedman, Councilmember
Gary George, Councilmember
Gary M. Luebbers, City Manager
Daniel J. McHugh, City Attorney
Lorrie Poyzer, City Clerk
Jeffrey L. Shaw, Community Development Director
ABSENT None
STUDY SESSION
Measure U Socio-Economic Study - The City Council held a third study session
to review the socio-economic cost/benefit evaluation criteria and process for
compliance with the implementation of Measure U and the General Plan.
Community Development Director Shaw reviewed the Planning Commission's
recommendation of the socio-economic cost/benefit evaluation criteria and
process implementing provisions of Measure U and the General Plan. He then
reviewed staff s recommendation which included the City Council's directives
from their previous study sessions. Resolution. No. 5580 approves and
implements the revised socio-economic checklist to include listing of thresholds
and the cost of benefit model and processing procedures as follows:
1. Complete the socio-economic evaluation and cost/benefit study as a separate
analysis but in conjunction with and at the same time as conducting the
environmental assessment of the project.
2. Utilize the socio-economic evaluation checklist as a process. Staff would
review projects. Projects that are determined to potentially have a
significant socio-economic impact may be required to prepare a study to
provide additional information and evaluate those impacts identified in the
checklist. If a study was needed that required a specific area of expertise, it
would be prepared by an independent consultant working for the City of
Redlands. The cost of completing any work on the study would be paid for
by the applicant. Appeals to staff determinations would go directly to the
City Council. The applicant or any member of the public may appeal the
Environmental Review Committee's decision.
3. Providing notification to the community that a project is being considered
by the City and is being evaluated for socio-economic cost/benefit impacts
should occur at the earliest point in the review process and throughout the
review process. Notice shall be provided in the following ways: (a) a ten
day notice in the newspaper and to all property owners within a 300 foot
Adjourned Regular Meeting
December 1, 1998
Page I
radius of the project for hearings before the Environmental Review
Committee, Planning Commission, and City Council; (b) an agenda item to
be included for the City Council meetings for upcoming Environmental
Review Committee and Planning Commission meetings; (c) an agenda item
to be included for the City Council meetings of prior actions by the
Environmental Review Committee and Planning Commission; and (d)
notification will be incorporated on the City's web site.
4. Regarding the implementation of a cost/benefit study for a proposed General
Plan, Specific Plan, or Concept Plan which do not have a specific project, by
adoption of Resolution No. 5579 (scheduled for the 3:00 P.M. session) the
City Council will determine that the type of development project required to
submit a socio-economic impact report is a development project which
shows a specific plan for building design or construction, such as a
subdivision map, conditional use permit, Planning Commission review and
approval, or building permit - not a development project which merely
consists of a general plan amendment, specific plan amendment, concept
plan, or zone change.
5. Regarding the requirement to determine if "the benefit of the development
project to the City outweighs any direct cost to the City...." the City would
evaluate, consider, and "weigh" information derived from the socio-
economic elements along with information derived from the cost/benefit
analysis in coming to a final determination.
Resolution No. 5580 - Measure U - Councilmember Banda asked for more
definitive language in the "Processing Procedure" paragraph (B.2) of Resolution
No. 5580 by amending the second-to-last sentence to read: "Dependant upon the
expertise required, such additional studies may be prepared by City staff or by
an independent consultant under contract to the City." This change was
acceptable to members of the City Council. Mayor Cunningham said this
document was a better piece of work than proponents of Measure U anticipated.
He complimented staff for a "yeoman piece of work" and moved to adopt
Resolution No. 5580, a resolution of the City Council of the City of Redlands
establishing procedures for the processing of socio-economic analyses and
cost/benefit studies pursuant to the Redlands General Plan (Measure U).
Motion seconded by Councilmember Banda and carried unanimously.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, the City Council meeting adjourned at
9:29 A.M. The next regular meeting will be held on December 1, 1998, at
3:00 P.M.
City Clerk
Adjourned Regular Meeting
December 1, 1998
Page 2