Redding’s Draft General Plan will be coming back to the Planning Commission in February, according to a statement by Development Services Director Jeremy Pagan. The original plan was horrific, consisting of a series of weak platitudes such as “strive to,” “seek,” “consider,” and “encourage.” Due to considerable criticism of the weak, meaningless wording, the language was changed in many instances, but not all.
In addition to the inclusion of all the weasel words, there are two other areas of great concern:
- The General Plan calls for protection of stream corridors, including a recommendation that development be set back at least 75 feet from the edge of the Sacramento River riparian zone or 150 feet from the top of the river bank (whichever is greater), which is commendable. Unfortunately, a footnote on Figure NR-1 exempts all “water orientated commercial projects in the Cypress Avenue, Park Marina, and Convention Center areas” from the standard setbacks. Additionally, Policy NR5A allows any and all stream setbacks to be reduced, making the stream corridor protections nearly worthless. As a side note, the City Zoning Ordinance is even worse, stating that all prescribed buffers are average setbacks, not minimums, and that “Reduced setbacks are appropriate for water-oriented/commercial activities and for bluff areas for that section of the river between the North Market Street Bridge and the alignment of the future Parkview Bridge” (emphasis added). The added slash (“/”) in water-oriented/commercial activities suggests that all commercial activities are exempt from the standard setback, which is even weaker than the proposed General Plan policy. The Zoning Ordinance also contains a whole section allowing reduced setbacks along all other stream corridors.
- Another second major problem is found in the weak wording of the Climate Action Plan policy. Environmental Justice Section 3E of the Draft General Plan says, Consider the development and adoption of a Climate Action and Resiliency Plan. Support plans, standards, regulations, incentives, and investments, and seek grants and other funding to reduce the impacts of climate change on vulnerable residents. This sounds like the City has already considered it and definitely does not want to adopt a Climate Action Plan.
We will keep you updated when this comes to the Planning Commission. Look for our next Action Alert.
For more environmental issues and SEA news—including info on oak seedling and shade tree programs, trail cleanups, and Earth Day preparations—please see Shasta Environmental Alliance’s February 2024 Newsletter.
~David Ledger, Conservation Chair
*This corrects and expands on issues related to the General Plan in an earlier edition of our newsletter.*