Planning Commission backs rezoning to meet Redlands housing targets despite significant EIR findings

The Redlands Planning Commission on April 22 voted to recommend city council adoption of a package of rezones and a subsequent environmental impact report intended to implement the city’s 2021–2029 housing element rezoning program.

Planning staff opened the public hearing and said the project would rezone parcels identified in the housing element for medium- and high-density residential use to help address the citywide RHNA shortfall. Staff noted the Southern California Association of Governments assigned Redlands a regional housing needs allocation of just over 3,500 dwelling units and the city’s adopted housing element added a 20% contingency buffer, bringing the practical planning target to “just over 4,200 dwelling units.” The staff presentation also described mapped rezoning sites concentrated in West Redlands along the south side of Citrus Avenue and several parcels in North Redlands.

The city’s subsequent environmental impact report (EIR) analyzed the rezoning at a programmatic scale and—according to staff—concluded the project would cause or continue to cause significant and unavoidable impacts in agricultural resources, air quality and greenhouse gas emissions, and transportation with respect to vehicle miles traveled (VMT). Because of those conclusions, staff said the city would need to adopt a statement of overriding considerations that explains why the project benefits outweigh those environmental harms before the city council could approve the project.

Commissioners questioned the effects on existing industrial parcels, floodplain constraints and outreach to property owners. Planning staff and the director said the parcels had been identified in the housing element adopted by city council in 2022 and that the rezoning step now matches the adopted inventory. Staff said existing uses on rezoned parcels could continue, but future new industrial development would not be permitted on those lots once rezoned. Staff also explained that developability criteria—including floodplain status, fire risk and utilities—were considered during the site selection process.

Public comment included several speakers supporting increased zoning capacity and greater density. Bobby Garrity said, “we are in a severe housing crisis…this rezoning will increase our total zone capacity” but urged the city to consider allowing higher densities than the R‑2/R‑3 ranges proposed. Other speakers urged broader rezoning and cautioned about impacts to long‑standing agricultural and industrial property owners.

After deliberation, Commissioner Wells moved and Commissioner Elliott seconded a motion recommending that city council certify the final subsequent EIR, adopt findings of fact, the mitigation monitoring and reporting program and the statement of overriding considerations (Resolution No. 1703) and that the commission recommend adoption of General Plan Amendment No. 149, Zone Change No. 479, and associated concept plan and specific plan amendments (Resolution No. 1704). The motion carried.

Votes at a glance - Motion to certify the final subsequent EIR and recommend adoption of findings, mitigation monitoring and a statement of overriding considerations (Reso. 1703) — moved by Commissioner Wells; seconded by Commissioner Elliott; outcome: motion carries (recommendation to city council). - Motion to recommend adoption of General Plan Amendment No. 149, Zone Change No. 479 and associated amendments (Reso. 1704) — moved by Commissioner Wells; seconded by Commissioner Elliott; outcome: motion carries (recommendation to city council).

What remains next: the Planning Commission’s action was a recommendation to city council. Staff noted the project’s environmental documents and the recommended zoning map changes will be transmitted to city council for final decisions, and the EIR’s findings and statement of overriding considerations will be part of that council hearing.