Established in the 2000 General Plan, the City uses a park classification system to categorize its parkland inventory, consisting of small neighborhood parks, large neighborhood parks, community parks, regional parks, natural area park land, and special purpose facility parks. The developed and future acreage of all parkland in the City by park type, as inventoried in the 2023 City of Redding Parks and Trails Inventory provided by the City of Redding Parks and Recreation department, is shown in Table 5.15-7, City of Redding Parks Inventory. The location of the City’s parks are shown on the exhibits associated Figure 5.15-4, Parks in Redding.
As shown in Table 5.15 -7, the City does not currently meet its target of 10 -acres per residents. In correspondence with the City Parks and Recreation department, it was noted that the distribution of parks is not consistent with park access rule of ½-mile for all residents. Furthermore, the facilities making up the park system are not up to the standard s of the Parks, Trails and Open Space Master Plan (see Appendix
5.15-1).
Packet Pg. 1401
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
CITY OF REDDING
REDDING GENERAL PLAN
0 0.5 10.25
Miles
Figure 5.15-4bcd
Parks and Recreation Facilities in Redding - Map(s) 1-3 Park Locations and Type
Community Park
Large Neighborhood
Natural Area Park
Regional Park
Small Neighborhood
Special Purpose Facility
Source: GHD and Placeworks, 2022
REDDING GENERAL PLAN UPDATED DRAFT EIR
CITY OF REDDING
Source: Generated using ArcMap, 2023; City of Redding GIS 2017, 2019, 2021, and 2022.
Figure 5.15-4a
Parks and Recreation Facilities in Redding
PLACEWORKS
Redding SOI
Redding City Limit0
Scale (Miles)
2 44
CALIFORNIA
273
CALIFORNIA
273
CALIFORNIA
299
CALIFORNIA
299
CALIFORNIA
5 5
299
CALIFORNIA
299
CALIFORNIA
273
CALIFORNIA
5 5
44 CALIFORNIA
Map 1Map 1
See Fig 5.15-4bSee Fig 5.15-4b
Map 2Map 2
See Fig 5.15-4cSee Fig 5.15-4c
Map 3Map 3
See Fig 5.15-4dSee Fig 5.15-4d
5.15 PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION
Pine Grove AvePine Grove Ave
Shasta Dam BlvdShasta Dam Blvd
Lake BlvdLake Blvd
Bear Mountain RdBear Mountain Rd
Oasis RdOasis Rd
Keswick Dam RdKeswick Dam Rd
Quartz Hill RdQuartz Hill Rd
Placer StPlacer St
Buenaventura BlvdBuenaventura Blvd
Shasta Shasta Vista DrVista Dr
Victor AveVictor Ave
Hartnell AveHartnell Ave
Boyle RdBoyle Rd
Old Alturas RdOld Alturas Rd
Old Alturas RdOld Alturas Rd
Old Oregon TrlOld Oregon Trl
Old 44 RdOld 44 Rd
Alta Mesa DrAlta Mesa Dr
Airport RdAirport Rd
Chum Crk RdChum Crk Rd
Rancho RdRancho Rd
S S
Bonnyview Bonnyview RdRd
Meadow View DrMeadow View Dr
Dersch RdDersch Rd
Placer StPlacer St
Lower Springs RdLower Springs Rd
Branstetter LnBranstetter Ln
Texas Springs Texas Springs
RdRd
Clear Creek RdClear Creek Rd
Canyon RdCanyon Rd
Riverside AveRiverside Ave
Cypress AveCypress Ave
China Gulch DrChina Gulch Dr
Packet Pg. 1402
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
CITY OF REDDING
REDDING GENERAL PLAN
0 0.50.25
Miles
Figure 5.15-4bcd
Parks and Recreation Facilities in Redding - Map(s) 1-3 Park Locations and Type
Community Park
Large Neighborhood
Natural Area Park
Regional Park
Small Neighborhood
Special Purpose Facility
Source: GHD and Placeworks, 2022
REDDING GENERAL PLAN UPDATED DRAFT EIR
CITY OF REDDING
Figure 5.15-4b
Parks and Recreation Facilities in Redding - Map 1
PLACEWORKS
Redding SOI
Redding City Limit
44 CALIFORNIA
273
CALIFORNIA
273
CALIFORNIA
299
CALIFORNIA
5 5
299
CALIFORNIA
0 Scale (Miles)
0.5 Source: Generated using ArcMap, 2023; City of Redding GIS 2017, 2019, 2021, and 2022.
5.15 PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION
Placer StPlacer St
Buenaventura BlvdBuenaventura Blvd
Oasis RdOasis Rd
Keswick Dam RdKeswick Dam Rd
Quartz Hill RdQuartz Hill Rd
Cypress AveCypress Ave
Hartnell AveHartnell Ave
Hilltop DrHilltop Dr
Bechelli LnBechelli Ln
Airpark DrAirpark Dr
Court StCourt St Park Marina DrPark Marina Dr
Lake BlvdLake Blvd
N Market StN Market St
Benton DrBenton Dr
East StEast St
Packet Pg. 1403
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
CITY OF REDDING
REDDING GENERAL PLAN
0 0.50.25
Miles
Figure 5.15-4bcd
Parks and Recreation Facilities in Redding - Map(s) 1-3 Park Locations and Type
Large Neighborhood
Natural Area Park
Regional Park
Small Neighborhood
Special Purpose Facility
Source: GHD and Placeworks, 2022
REDDING GENERAL PLAN UPDATED DRAFT EIR
CITY OF REDDING
Figure 5.15-4c
Parks and Recreation Facilities in Redding - Map 2
PLACEWORKS
Redding SOI
Redding City Limit0
Scale (Miles)
0.5 44
CALIFORNIA
5 5
44 CALIFORNIA
Source: Generated using ArcMap, 2023; City of Redding GIS 2017, 2019, 2021, and 2022.
5.15 PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION
Old Alturas RdOld Alturas Rd
Cypress AveCypress Ave
Hartnell AveHartnell Ave
Shasta Shasta Vista DrVista Dr
Old 44 RdOld 44 Rd
Victor AveVictor Ave Alta Mesa DrAlta Mesa Dr
Chum Crk RdChum Crk Rd
Rancho RdRancho Rd
Boyle RdBoyle Rd
Airport RdAirport Rd
Argyle RdArgyle Rd
S Bonnyview RdS Bonnyview Rd
Bechelli LnBechelli Ln
Packet Pg. 1404
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
CITY OF REDDING
REDDING GENERAL PLAN
0 0.50.25
Miles
Figure 5.15-4bcd
Parks and Recreation Facilities in Redding - Map(s) 1-3 Park Locations and Type
Community Park
Large Neighborhood
Natural Area Park
Regional Park
Small Neighborhood
Special Purpose Facility
Source: GHD and Placeworks, 2022
REDDING GENERAL PLAN UPDATED DRAFT EIR
CITY OF REDDING
Figure 5.15-4d
Parks and Recreation Facilities in Redding - Map 3
PLACEWORKS
Redding SOI
Redding City Limit
273
CALIFORNIA
5 5
273
CALIFORNIA
5 5
44 CALIFORNIA
0 Scale (Miles)
0.5 Source: Generated using ArcMap, 2023; City of Redding GIS 2017, 2019, 2021, and 2022.
5.15 PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION
Victor AveVictor Ave
Alta Mesa DrAlta Mesa Dr
Chum Crk RdChum Crk Rd
Hartnell AveHartnell Ave
Cypress AveCypress Ave
Shasta Shasta
Vista DrVista Dr
S Bonnyview RdS Bonnyview Rd
Rancho RdRancho Rd
Clear Creek RdClear Creek Rd
Canyon RdCanyon Rd
Meadow View DrMeadow View Dr
Placer StPlacer St
Hilltop DrHilltop Dr
Branstetter LnBranstetter Ln
Cedars RdCedars Rd
Bechelli LnBechelli Ln
Packet Pg. 1405
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
PUBLIC SERVICES, PARKS, AND RECREATION
PLACEWORKS 5.15-59
TABLE 5.15-7 CITY OF REDDING PARKS INVENTORY
Park Type/Park Name Address Site Size Developed Acres Future Acres Small Neighborhood Parks
Amethyst Park 2950 Amethyst Way 0.57 0.57
Blossom Park Site 1325 Montclair DR 5.88 5.88
Bob White Park 931 Springer Drive 0.41 0.41
Carnelian Park 2487 Lake Redding Drive 0.52 0.52
Clover Creek Park 2555 Clover Creek Street 1.73 0.60
Country Heights Park 2899 Howard Drive 3.58 1.75
Creekside Park 6596 Creekside Street 3.13 0.87 2.26
East Oak Park 1399 Arizona Street 2.60 2.60
Foothill Park 1160 Hillcrest Place 1.00 0.50
Foxtail Park 1460 Foxtail Court 0.79 0.79
Hawn Park (aka Rotary Park) 2703 Hawn Avenue 0.34 0.34
Indian Hills Park 3575 Auburn Drive 1.40 0.75
Magnolia Park 1614 Magnolia Ave 1.70 1.70
Martin Luther King Jr. Park 1815 Sheridan Street 3.08 3.08 Meadow Creek Park 6510 Hemlock Street 1.87 0.50
Minder Park 1210 Minder Drive 1.00 1.00
Northridge Gardens Park 960 Hillsdale Court 0.75 0.75
Parkview Green 2855 Lanning Avenue 0.59 0.59
Peppertree Park 500 Peppertree Lane 1.84 1.21 0.63
Ravenwood Park 2001 Charade Way 0.76 0.76
Cumberland Park 2150 Cumberland Drive 6.06 1.83
River Ridge Terrace Site 1325 Spinnaker Drive 2.04 2.04 Rolling Hills Park 3890 Oro Street 1.26 1.26
Salmonberry Park Site 1505 Imperial Drive 2.00 2.00
Stillwater Heights Park 4525 Lynbrook Loop 1.85 1.85
T.R. Woods Memorial Park 955 Royal Oaks Drive 3.00 2.00 Valley Ridge Park 5414 Valley Ridge Drive 1.46 0.50
Vista Ridge Park 555 Whet Owl Way 0.92 0.92
Waverly Park 2550 Central Waverly 0.75 0.75
Western Oaks Park 2370 Western Oak Drive 1.71 1.71
Large Neighborhood Parks
Alta Mesa Park 3600 Scorpius Way 5.83 5.83
Churn Creek Site 2013 East Cypress Avenue 17.03 17.03
Gregory Lake 118 Oak Mesa Lane 22.45 22.45
Highland Park 555 Mill Valley Parkway 7.07 7.07
Packet Pg. 1406
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
PUBLIC SERVICES, PARKS, AND RECREATION
5.15-60 FEBRUARY 2024
Park Type/Park Name Address Site Size Developed Acres Future Acres Lake Redding Park 2225 Benton Drive 10.00 10.00
Mountain View School Park Site 685 Shasta View Drive 6.41 6.41 Panorama Park 900, 950 Lake Boulevard 10.53 10.53
Rivercrest Park 4325 Chinook Drive 6.25 3.85 2.40
Salt Creek Heights 4270 Haleakala Ave 13.84 6.20 7.67
Shastina Ranch 8500 Shasta View Drive 11.00 11.00
Sulphur Creek Park Site 1547 Nancy Court 10.00 10.00
Community Parks
Buckeye Park 3500 Hiatt Drive 9.25 9.25
Buenaventura Fields 3881 Placer Road 15.00 15.00
Caldwell East 971 N Market Street 10.62 10.62
Cascade Park 2975 Girvan Road 27.63 4.00 8.25
South City Park / Tiger Field 955 Parkview Avenue 17.75 17.75 Twin View Site 901 College View Drive 40.49 40.49
Regional Parks
Caldwell Park 58 Quartz Hill Road 73.84 63.84
Enterprise Park 1755 El Vista Street 94.59 25.00 69.59
Natural Area Parks
Buckeye Natural Area Park 3500 Hiatt Drive 17.84 17.84
Clover Creek Preserve 705 Shasta View Drive 129.00 106.00 23.00 Mary Lake Park 1696 Lakeside Drive 29.59 29.59
Peppertree Natural Area Park 515 Peppertree Lane 26.46 26.46 Special Purpose Facilities
Benton Dog Park 1700 Airpark Drive 2.30 2.30
Carnegie Park 1552 Placer Street 0.63 0.63
Civic Center Grounds 777 Cypress Avenue 3.29 3.29
Community Gardens 1550 Riverside Drive 3.60 3.60
Civic Auditorium Grounds 700 Auditorium Drive 10.00 10.00 Graham Park 955 Hartnell Avenue 0.20 0.20
John Reginato River Access 3855 South Bonnyview Road 6.00 4.00 2.00 Old City Hall 1313 Market Street 0.16 0.16
Redding Soccer Park 9800 Old Oregon Trail 47.00 25.00
Redding Sports Park (Big League
Dreams) 20155 Viking Way 57.00 35.00
Riverfront Park 800 Sundial Bridge Drive 19.00 1.90
Rodeo Grounds (aka Posse
Grounds) 715 Auditorium Drive 12.00 12.00
Packet Pg. 1407
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
PUBLIC SERVICES, PARKS, AND RECREATION
PLACEWORKS 5.15-61
Park Type/Park Name Address Site Size Developed Acres Future Acres Sculpture Park at City Hall 777 Cypress Avenue 2.50 2.50 Senior Citizens Hall 2290 Benton Drive 2.56 2.56
Softball Park (S. City Park) 900 Parkview Avenue 0.00 0.00 Stillwater Plant Site 6383 Airport Road 80.00 80.00
Turtle Bay Boat Launch 725 Auditorium Drive 2.00 2.00
TOTAL 877.67 471.04 308.51
Trail Acres
Trails (6.06 acres per mi, 28.3 mi)1 174.52
Parks & Trails TOTAL 877.67 645.56 308.51
Population2 93,611
Total Level of Service in 2023 6.90
Source: Redding Parks and Recreation 2018; Redding 2019 1 The methodology for the trail acreage calculation used in the Parks Master Plans is explained on page 11 of the Development F ee Nexus Study (Redding 2019)
2 As provided by the City of Redding Parks and Recreation Department in the 2023 City of Redding Parks Inventory * Bolded parks and recreation facilities are planned and have not yet been constructed
THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
According to Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, a project would normally have a significant effect on the environment if the project would:
REC-1 Result in Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated; or
REC-2 Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered park facilities, or result in the need for new or physically altered park facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, i n order to maintain acceptable service ratios or other performance objectives.
REC-3 In combination with past, present, and reasonably foreseeable projects, result in cumulative parks and recreation impacts in the area.
Packet Pg. 1408
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
PUBLIC SERVICES, PARKS, AND RECREATION
5.15-62 FEBRUARY 2024
PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN POLICIES
The following policies of the 2023-2045 General Plan are relevant to recreation facilities and services.
Environmental Justice Element
▪ Policy EJ6E: Strive to ensure Ensure that residents have access to a variety of recreational amenities by adhering to the policies of the Community Development and Design; Natural Resource; Parks, Trails, and Recreation; Public Health and Safety Elements of this General Plan; and the Parks, Trails, and Open Space Master Plan. Consult with representatives of local Wintu tribes as appropriate to locate and construct trails with cultural considerations in mind.
▪ Policy EJ6G: As funding and resources permit, implement the adopted Parks, Trails and Open Space Master Plan which will advance the role of parks, recreation and community services to establish parks as centers for community health, smart growth, equitable development and environmental justice.
Parks, Trails, and Recreation Element
▪ Policy R1A: Continue to monitor community demographics and socio-economic factors to ensure that recreation programs and park facilities with intent to meet the most pressing needs. ▪ Policy R1B: Explore the creation of recreation -based programs and park facilities in conjunction with law enforcement, schools, local colleges, local businesses and community groups that address social concerns for youth and lead to healthy outcomes and improved community wellbeing. ▪ Policy R1C: Program recreation activities jointly with schools, local colleges, and community partners, where appropriate.
▪ Policy R1D: Continue to design parks, trails and recreational facilities to support activity throughout the year . Work to provide and support cultural and recreational events and activities to engage residents. ▪ Policy R2A: Seek to identify and obtain funding to prepare and implement a Regional River Parkway Plan for areas along the Sacramento River between Shasta Dam and the City of Anderson to address:
o Resource protection.
o Habitat assessment and management.
o Recreational opportunities.
o Location of existing and proposed facilities.
o Recommendations for speed limits and use restrictions on the river, where warranted. o Acquisition of lands.
o Management and operations.
o Restoration activities.
Packet Pg. 1409
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
PUBLIC SERVICES, PARKS, AND RECREATION
PLACEWORKS 5.15-63
▪ Policy R2C: Continue to plan and implement a public trail network along the Sacramento River that provides active and passive recreation, amenities, public access, and wayfinding to ensure connectivity to other destinations.
▪ Policy R2D : Protect and enhanc e access for public safety, fire and rescue activities to the entire riverfront and creek corridors while minimizing and mitigating impacts to the extent feasible. ▪ Policy R2E: Encourage community stewardship and volunteerism to protect, preserve, rehabilitate and highlight the Sacramento River corridor and its natural, historical, pre-historical and cultural resources. ▪ Policy R2F: Plan, encourage and support projects and efforts to preserve and restore native habitat along the Sacramento River and creek corridors in the Planning Area by preserving native plants and by removing invasive non-native plants. Fund and staff regularly s cheduled preventative maintenance as budget allows.
▪ Policy R2H: Collaborate with local businesses and independent ventures that provide and support a diverse range of recreational services, and amenities along the Sacramento River . Evaluate and encourage opportunities for updated and innovative recreational infrastructure through public/ private partnerships.
▪ Policy R3A: Establish park sites, trails, public open -space areas and other recreational lands along the river and creek corridors through public and private land acquisitions, land dedications, conservation easements, and similar mechanisms as opportunities allow. ▪ Policy R5A: Continue to implement and update as appropriate the Parks, Trails, and Open Space Master Plan (Parks Master Plan).
▪ Policy R5C: Plan to locate at least one Large Community Park in each quadrant of the city as indicated generally on the General Plan Diagram.
▪ Policy R5D: Accept park land dedications only when such dedications meet the goals and policies of the Parks, Trails, and Open Space Master Plan.
▪ Policy R5E: As opportunities and funding are available, acquire Large Neighborhood and Community Park sites in advance of their actual need and explore innovative methods for acquiring park and land for recreational activities and amenities.
▪ Policy R5F: Work to disperse a variety of park facilities and amenities throughout the community, with the goal that every resident lives within a one-half mile walkable or bikeable radius to the nearest park, trail, or recreational amenity.
▪ Policy R5G: Locate parks adjacent to school facilities, whenever possible, to maximize recreational opportunities and joint use of facilities.
▪ Policy R5H: Work to establish agreements with local schools which will allow other agencies, groups, or members of the public to use special facilities and grounds (such as multipurpose rooms, gymnasiums, sports fields, basketball courts, etc.) during times when school is not in sessio n to accommodate additional community and recreational activities. Where such agreements are in effect, the facilities may be included in the City's parkland inventory.
▪ Policy R5I: Work to increase the acreage and quality of developed park facilities by placing a priority on:
Packet Pg. 1410
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
PUBLIC SERVICES, PARKS, AND RECREATION
5.15-64 FEBRUARY 2024
- Building out existing Large Neighborhood and/ or Community Parks that are underdeveloped. - Encouraging developers of large residential projects to dedicate land beyond minimum code requirements.
- Encouraging community -based park and trail improvements such as gifts or community - improvement projects.
- Coordinating improvements and programs with nonprofit organizations, schools, other agencies, and private-sector providers to avoid duplication of facilities and programs. ▪ Policy R5J: Encourage co -location of public and private parks with flood -control facilities, such as stormwater detention basins, where appropriate, to maximize the efficient use of land. ▪ Policy R5K: Pursue the acquisition of surplus federal, state, and local lands, and grants, to meet present and future park and recreation needs.
▪ Policy R5L: Work with citizens groups and other agencies to prioritize development of and identify appropriate locations for Special Purpose Facilities. Facilities to be considered may include sports field complexes, indoor and outdoor recreation facilities, or an indoor or outdoor aquatics complex. ▪ Policy R5M: New parks and recreational facilities should be designed for residents of all abilities and at all stages of life.
▪ Policy R6A: Adhere to the standards of the Parks, Trails, and Open Space Master Plan to ensure that new residential projects provide appropriate levels of improved open -space and/or recreational amenities.
▪ Policy R6B: Continue to require developers of residential property to contribute park sites or pay in-lieu fees allowed by State law.
▪ Policy R6C: Continue to require both residential and commercial development to pay impact fees for their fair share of the costs of constructing/providing new facilities so that new development maintains the current service level of park facilities.
▪ Policy R6D: Adjust parkland in-lieu fees as necessary to reflect current land values. ▪ Policy R7A: Encourage the County to develop a regional park system or provide financial support to other local jurisdictions providing parkland and amenities for County residents. ▪ Policy R8A: Encourage a regional approach to the provision, planning, and development of recreation facilities and programs by promoting cooperation with school districts, special service districts, community-based organizations, neighboring communities, Shasta Count y, State, and the Federal government. Recognize that policies and programs restricted to jurisdictional boundaries can impede the provision of high-quality facilities and programs that benefit the citizens of Redding. ▪ Policy R10A: Adjust park-development fees regularly to reflect current park-development costs. ▪ Policy R10B: Explore innovative means to fund new facilities and maintain existing and future parks.
Packet Pg. 1411
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
PUBLIC SERVICES, PARKS, AND RECREATION
PLACEWORKS 5.15-65
▪ Policy R10C: Continue to offer “Adopt a Park” and “Adopt a Trail” programs to encourage volunteer groups, service, and other members of the private sector to assist with the development and maintenance of park and recreation facilities. If ongoing maintenance is an is sue, innovative ways of providing this service need exploration prior to any prohibition on development of these park and recreation facilities.
▪ Policy R10D: Pursue joint development and service agreements with school districts. ▪ Policy R10E: Ensure all new neighborhood parks and existing parks where feasible, are placed into Landscape Maintenance Districts if approved through proper protest voting procedures. ▪ Policy R11A: Utilize as appropriate the trail system plan of the Parks, Trails, and Open Space Master Plan to locate future trails. In general, the trail system should:
o Focus on linking neighborhoods to one another and other land uses and significant destination points within the community.
o Separate bicyclists and pedestrians from vehicular traffic, whenever feasible. o Provide continuous trail connections that serve multiple needs, focusing on recreation and active transportation, and combining the two in a multifunctional facility when advantageous. o Encourage diverse design and construction techniques for trails. o Ensure appropriate fire safety standards and fire equipment access where feasible. o Provide trailhead amenities such as parking, restrooms, information boards, signage and maps as funding allows.
▪ Policy R11B: Continue development of the Sacramento River Trail connecting recreational, educational, cultural, commercial, and residential areas/uses.
▪ Policy R11C: Continue to obtain land dedications and/or easements for the development of public trails and the Regional River Parkway through direct purchases and the discretionary approval process for new development.
▪ Policy R11D: Pursue funding which can be used for parkway and trail-system planning, land acquisitions, construction, and maintenance.
▪ Policy R11E: Bicycle and trail systems should be designed in a manner that considers the privacy and security of adjacent land uses, allows for easy maneuvering, and promotes user safety. ▪ Policy R11F: Encourage the establishment of volunteer bicycle-path/recreation-trail patrols to improve the real and perceived level of safety for users of those facilities. ▪ Policy R12A: Encourage efforts to develop recreational opportunities in the natural areas neighboring the City, including the Swasey Recreation Area, Horsetown - Clear Creek Preserve, the Westside Trails, and the Clear Creek Trail.
▪ Policy R12B: Connect the City’s trail system to regional trails where possible and collaborate on the development of a robust trail network.
Packet Pg. 1412
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
PUBLIC SERVICES, PARKS, AND RECREATION
5.15-66 FEBRUARY 2024
IMPACT DISCUSSION
REC-1 The proposed project would not increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities, such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated. [Threshold REC-1]
The growth forecasted under the 2023 -2045 General Plan would result in an estimated population of 137,377 residents in the City and SOI by 2045, increasing the existing population in the city and SOI from 117,938 in 2020 1 . This increase in population would increase the use of existing park and recreational facilities.
Each jurisdiction in California determines the appropriate park standard based on the guidance provided by Section 666477 of the California Government Code, commonly referred to as the Quimby Act, which requires a standard of 5 acres of parkland per 1,000 residents. The City’s park standard is 10 acres of parkland per 1,000 residents (Goal R5 in the 2023-2045 General Plan).
With 646 acres of existing parks and recreational facilities (including approximately 174.5 acres of trails), the City currently provides approximately 6.90 acres per 1,000 residents (as calculated by the 2023 City of Redding Parks and Trails Inventory). Using the City’s established park standard of 10 acres for every 1,000 residents, approximately 326 acres of parkland would be required to meet the standard based on the current population2.
The Parks, Trails, and Open Space Master Plan recognizes that the construction of the planned parks and recreation facilities will depend on the availability of funding. Under the assumption that all planned parks will be developed, the City’s level of service for parks and recreation facilities would be 6.95 acres per 1,000 residents by 2045 under the 2023-2045 General Plan. To meet the 10 acres per 1,000 residents service standard, approximately 419 acres of parkland would be required to serve the 2045 population.
However, the City will continue to update its Parks, Trails, and Open Space Master Plan as necessary to ensure that enough parkland is available to meet the needs of its residents and the meet the established General Plan standard. The 2023-2045 General Plan also includes several policies that would promote the development new park facilities and help to fund them. Policy R6 directs the City to continue to require both residential and commercial development to pay impact fees for their fair share of the cos ts of
1 See Chapter 3, Project Description, for more information about the 2023-2045 General Plan Planning Horizon development and modeling assumptions.
2 The current population used in this calculation is 106,81 residents, as shown in Table 3-2 of Chapter 3, Project Description. As noted in Chapter 3, the estimates and projections used in this EIR are conservative and based on regional travel demand model developed by SRTA. Therefore, the acreage needed to meet the City service standard, as expressed here, is conservative and may overestimate the acreage needed to meet current demand.
Packet Pg. 1413
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
PUBLIC SERVICES, PARKS, AND RECREATION
PLACEWORKS 5.15-67
constructing/providing new facilities so that new development maintains the current service level of park facilities. Policy R10A also directs the City to adjust park-development fees regularly to reflect current park- development costs. Furthermore, this General Plan Update does not include any changes to the City’s land use designations that would induce population growth beyond what expected to occur in the City over the next 22 years. Therefore, the proposed project will be less than significant.
Level of Significance Before Mitigation: REC-1 would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.
REC-2 The proposed project would not include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of additional recreational facilities that might have an adverse physical effect on the environment. [Threshold REC-2]
The 2023-2045 General Plan would result in development that would increase the demand for parks and recreational facilities. This would likely result in the need for new or expanded park facilities. However, the locations of such facilities are not known a t this time. As a result, it cannot be determined what project - specific environmental impacts would occur from their construction and operation. These potential impacts would be identified during the facility site selection process.
In addition, the 2023-2045 General Plan includes policies and actions that would help ensure that parkland goals are met. Policies R3A, R5A, R5C, R5F, R5I ensure that new parkland and recreational facilities are developed to accommodate the growing population. Additionally, Policies R5K, R6B, R6C, R6 D, R10A, and R10B ensure that park and recreational facilities are funded.
As a result of the proposed policies, parks and recreation facility impacts would be less than significant.
Level of Significance Before Mitigation: REC-2 would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.
Packet Pg. 1414
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
PUBLIC SERVICES, PARKS, AND RECREATION
5.15-68 FEBRUARY 2024
REC-3 Implementation of the proposed project would not in combination with past, present, and reasonably foreseeable projects, result in cumulative parks and recreation impacts in the area. [Threshold REC-3] Future growth in the area would result in increased demand for park and recreational facilities throughout the city and region. As a result, and as described in impact discussion REC-1 and REC-2, the City would need to expand and construct additional parks and other recreational facilities to meet the increased demand and maintain existing service levels. State law allows jurisdictions to require additional development to fund park improvements, and the City requires new residential development to pay development impact fees to help fund parks and recreation. Proper implementation of the policies listed under Impacts REC -1 would also help ensure the provision of adequate parklands along with new development. The final location and size of additional faciliti es would be determined as part of future development activity, and as specific parkland expansion or improvement projects are identified, additional project -specific, environmental analysis would be completed. As a result, the proposed project would not re sult in a cumulatively considerable impact to park and recreational facilities and cumulative impacts would be less than significant. No mitigation measures are required.
Level of Significance Before Mitigation: REC-3 would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.
Packet Pg. 1415
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
PUBLIC SERVICES, PARKS, AND RECREATION
PLACEWORKS 5.15-69
5.15.6 REFERENCES
Benda, David. 2020, February 25. Redding gets $6.7M state grant to expand, improve Caldwell Park. https://www.redding.com/story/news/local/2020/02/25/redding-gets-6-7-m-grant-expand- improve-caldwell-park/4871050002/
California Department of Education. 2023a, January 13 (Accessed). Enrollment Multi -Year Summary by Grade- Columbia-East Valley K -6 Community Day Report (45 -69948-0101113). https://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/dqcensus/EnrGrdYears.aspx?cds=45699480101113&agglevel=sc hool&year=2021-22
––––––. 2023b, January 13 (Accessed). Enrollment Multi -Year Summary by Grade - Columbia Elementary Report (45-69948-6050181).
https://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/dqcensus/EnrGrdYears.aspx?cds=45699486050181&agglevel=sc hool&year=2021-22
––––––. 2023c, January 13 (Accessed). Enrollment Multi -Year Summary by Grade- Mountain View Middle Report (45-69948-6117857).
https://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/dqcensus/EnrGrdYears.aspx?cds=45699486117857&agglevel=sc hool&year=2021-22
––––––. 2023d, January 13 (Accessed). Enrollment Multi -Year Summary by Grade- Redding School of the Arts Report (45-69948-0134122).
https://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/dqcensus/EnrGrdYears.aspx?cds=45699480134122&agglevel=sc hool&year=2021-22
––––––. 2023e, January 13 (Accessed). Enrollment Multi -Year Summary by Grade- Alta Mesa Elementary Report (45-69971-6050215).
https://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/dqcensus/EnrGrdYears.aspx?cds=45699716050215&agglevel=sc hool&year=2021-22
––––––. 2023f, January 13 (Accessed). Enrollment Multi -Year Summary by Grade - Boulder Creek Elementary Report (45-69971-6111470).
https://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/dqcensus/EnrGrdYears.aspx?cds=45699716111470&agglevel=sc hool&year=2021-22
––––––. 2023g, January 13 (Accessed). Enrollment Multi-Year Summary by Grade- Lassen View Elementary Report (45-69971-6050223).
https://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/dqcensus/EnrGrdYears.aspx?cds=45699716050223&agglevel=sc hool&year=2021-22
Packet Pg. 1416
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
PUBLIC SERVICES, PARKS, AND RECREATION
5.15-70 FEBRUARY 2024
––––––. 2023h, January 13 (Accessed). Enrollment Multi -Year Summary by Grade - Mistletoe Elementary Report (45-69971-6050231).
https://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/dqcensus/EnrGrdYears.aspx?cds=45699716050231&agglevel=sc hool&year=2021-22
––––––. 2023i, January 13 (Accessed). Enrollment Multi -Year Summary by Grade- PACE Academy Charter Report (45-69971-0135830).
https://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/dqcensus/EnrGrdYears.aspx?cds=45699710135830&agglevel=sc hool&year=2021-22
––––––. 2023j, January 13 (Accessed). Enrollment Multi -Year Summary by Grade - Parsons Junior High Report (45-69971-6050249).
https://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/dqcensus/EnrGrdYears.aspx?cds=45699716050249&agglevel=sc hool&year=2021-22
––––––. 2023k, January 13 (Accessed). Enrollment Multi -Year Summary by Grade - Redding Collegiate Academy Report (45-69971-0135848).
https://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/dqcensus/EnrGrdYears.aspx?cds=45699710135848&agglevel=sc hool&year=2021-22
––––––. 2023 l, January 13 (Accessed). Enrollment Multi -Year Summary by Grade - Rother Elementary Report (45-69971-6050256).
https://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/dqcensus/EnrGrdYears.aspx?cds=45699716050256&agglevel=sc hool&year=2021-22
––––––. 2023m, January 13 (Accessed). Enrollment Multi -Year Summary by Grade - Shasta Meadows Elementary Report (45-69971-6050264).
https://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/dqcensus/EnrGrdYears.aspx?cds=45699716050264&agglevel=sc hool&year=2021-22
––––––. 2023n, January 13 (Accessed). Enrollment Multi -Year Summary by Grade- Buckeye School of the Arts Report (45-75267-6050090).
https://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/dqcensus/EnrGrdYears.aspx?cds=45752676050090&agglevel=sc hool&year=2021-22
––––––. 2023o, January 13 (Accessed). Enrollment Multi -Year Summary by Grade - Gateway Educational Options Report (45-75267-4530101).
https://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/dqcensus/EnrGrdYears.aspx?cds=45752674530101&agglevel=sc hool&year=2021-22
––––––. 2023p, January 13 (Accessed). Enrollment Multi -Year Summary by Grade - Rocky Point Charter Report (45-75267-0113407).
Packet Pg. 1417
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
PUBLIC SERVICES, PARKS, AND RECREATION
PLACEWORKS 5.15-71
https://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/dqcensus/EnrGrdYears.aspx?cds=45752670113407&agglevel=sc hool&year=2021-22
––––––. 2023q, January 13 (Accessed). Enrollment Multi-Year Summary by Grade- Grant Elementary Report (45-70003-6050330).
https://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/dqcensus/EnrGrdYears.aspx?cds=45752674530101&agglevel=sc hool&year=2021-22
––––––. 2023 r, January 13 (Accessed). Enrollment Multi -Year Summary by Grade - Pacheco Elementary Report (45-70094-6050447).
https://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/dqcensus/EnrGrdYears.aspx?cds=45700946050447&agglevel=sc hool&year=2021-22
––––––. 2023s, January 13 (Accessed). Enrollment Multi-Year Summary by Grade- Bonny View Elementary Report (45-70110-6050462).
https://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/dqcensus/EnrGrdYears.aspx?cds=45701106050462&agglevel=sc hool&year=2021-22
––––––. 2023 t, January 13 (Accessed). Enrollment Multi -Year Summary by Grade - Cypress Elementary Report (56-73759-6093165).
https://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/dqcensus/EnrGrdYears.aspx?cds=56737596093165&agglevel=sc hool&year=2021-22
––––––. 2023u, January 13 (Accessed). Enrollment Multi -Year Summary by Grade- Manzanita Elementary Report (45-70110-6050512).
https://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/dqcensus/EnrGrdYears.aspx?cds=45701106050512&agglevel=sc hool&year=2021-22
––––––. 2023v, January 13 (Accessed). Enrollment Multi-Year Summary by Grade- Monarch Learning Center Report (45-70110-6117931).
https://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/dqcensus/EnrGrdYears.aspx?cds=45701106117931&agglevel=sc hool&year=2021-22.
––––––. 2023w, January 13 (Accessed). Enrollment Multi-Year Summary by Grade- Sequoia Middle Report (45-70110-6050520).
https://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/dqcensus/EnrGrdYears.aspx?cds=45701106050520&agglevel=sc hool&year=2021-22
––––––. 2023x, January 13 (Accessed). Enrollment Multi -Year Summary by Grade- Stellar Charter Report (45-70110-0135889).
https://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/dqcensus/EnrGrdYears.aspx?cds=45701100135889&agglevel=sc hool&year=2021-22
Packet Pg. 1418
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
PUBLIC SERVICES, PARKS, AND RECREATION
5.15-72 FEBRUARY 2024
––––––. 2023y, January 13 (Accessed). Enrollment Multi -Year Summary by Grade - Sycamore Elementary Report (45-70110-6050538).
https://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/dqcensus/EnrGrdYears.aspx?cds=45701106050538&agglevel=sc hool&year=2021-22
––––––. 2023z, January 13 (Accessed). Enrollment Multi -Year Summary by Grade- Turtle Bay Report (45- 70110-6101612).
https://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/dqcensus/EnrGrdYears.aspx?cds=45701106101612&agglevel=sc hool&year=2021-22
––––––. 2023aa, January 13 (Accessed). Enrollment Multi-Year Summary by Grade- Redding STEM Academy Report (45-10454-0132944).
https://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/dqcensus/EnrGrdYears.aspx?cds=45104540132944&agglevel=sc hool&year=2021-22
––––––. 2023ab, January 13 (Accessed). Enrollment Multi-Year Summary by Grade- Shasta County Juvenile Court Report (45-10454-4530150).
https://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/dqcensus/EnrGrdYears.aspx?cds=45104544530150&agglevel=sc hool&year=2021-22
––––––. 2023a c, January 13 (Accessed). Enrollment Multi -Year Summary by Grade - Shasta County Independent Study Charter Report (45 -10454-0132647).
https://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/dqcensus/EnrGrdYears.aspx?cds=45104540132647&agglevel=sc hool&year=2021-22
––––––. 2023ad, January 13 (Accessed). Enrollment Multi-Year Summary by Grade- Enterprise High Report (45-70136-4532750).
https://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/dqcensus/EnrGrdYears.aspx?cds=45701364532750&agglevel=sc hool&year=2021-22
––––––. 2023ae, January 13 (Accessed). Enrollment Multi -Year Summary by Grade- Pioneer Continuation High Report (45-70136-4530200).
https://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/dqcensus/EnrGrdYears.aspx?cds=45701364530200&agglevel=sc hool&year=2021-22
––––––. 2023af, January 13 (Accessed). Enrollment Multi-Year Summary by Grade- Shasta Secondary Home Report (45-70136-4530267).
https://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/dqcensus/EnrGrdYears.aspx?cds=45701364530267&agglevel=sc hool&year=2021-22
––––––. 2023a g, January 13 (Accessed). Enrollment Multi -Year Summary by Grade - North State Independence High Report (45-70136-4530309).
Packet Pg. 1419
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
PUBLIC SERVICES, PARKS, AND RECREATION
PLACEWORKS 5.15-73
https://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/dqcensus/EnrGrdYears.aspx?cds=45701364530309&agglevel=sc hool&year=2021-22
––––––. 2023ah, January 13 (Accessed). Enrollment Multi-Year Summary by Grade- Shasta High Report (45- 70136-4537304).
https://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/dqcensus/EnrGrdYears.aspx?cds=45701364537304&agglevel=sc hool&year=2021-22
––––––. 2023ai, January 13 (Accessed). Enrollment Multi -Year Summary by Grade- University Preparatory Report (45-70136-0106013).
https://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/dqcensus/EnrGrdYears.aspx?cds=45701360106013&agglevel=sc hool&year=2021-22
California Department of Forestry and Fire Prevention (CAL FIRE), 2007. Shasta County FHSZ [Fire Hazard Severity Zone] Map. http://www.fire.ca.gov/fire_prevention/fhsz_maps_shasta.
Chandler, Michele. 2022, February 22. Redding plans ninth fire station, new firefighters, under city proposal.
Redding Record Searchlight . https://www.redding.com/story/news/2022/02/25/redding-council- oks-new-fire-station-firefighters-fire-truck-engine-city-proposal-response-time/6940985001/ Department of Finance (DOF). 2022. E -5 Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State, 2020 -2022. https://dof.ca.gov/forecasting/demographics/estimates/e-5-population-and- housing-estimates-for-cities-counties-and-the-state-2020-2022/ National Center for Education Statistics. 2023a, January 15 (Accessed). School Directory Information (2021- 2022 school year) -Columbia-East Valley K -6 Community Day. https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/schoolsearch/school_detail.asp?Search=1&InstName=Columbia- East+Valley+Community+Day&City=redding&SchoolType=1&SchoolType=2&SchoolType=3&Schoo lType=4&SpecificSchlTypes=all&IncGrade=-1&LoGrade=-1&HiGrade=-1&ID=060945011272 ––––––. 2023b, January 15 (Accessed). School Directory Information (2021 -2022 school year) -Columbia- East Valley K-6 Community Day.
https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/schoolsearch/school_detail.asp?Search=1&InstName=Columbia- East+Valley+Community+Day&City=redding&SchoolType=1&SchoolType=2&SchoolType=3&Schoo lType=4&SpecificSchlTypes=all&IncGrade=-1&LoGrade=-1&HiGrade=-1&ID=060945011272 ––––––. 2023c, January 15 (Accessed). School Directory Information (2021 -2022 school year) - Mountain View Middle.
https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/schoolsearch/school_detail.asp?Search=1&InstName=Mountain+View+ Middle&City=redding&SchoolType=1&SchoolType=2&SchoolType=3&SchoolType=4&SpecificSchl Types=all&IncGrade=-1&LoGrade=-1&HiGrade=-1&ID=060945008635 Packet Pg. 1420
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
PUBLIC SERVICES, PARKS, AND RECREATION
5.15-74 FEBRUARY 2024
––––––. 2023d, January 15 (Accessed). School Directory Information (2021 -2022 school year) - Redding School of the Arts.
https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/schoolsearch/school_detail.asp?Search=1&InstName=Redding+School+o f+the+Arts+&City=redding&SchoolType=1&SchoolType=2&SchoolType=3&SchoolType=4&Specific SchlTypes=all&IncGrade=-1&LoGrade=-1&HiGrade=-1&ID=060238514024 ––––––. 2023e, January 15 (Accessed). School Directory Information (2021 -2022 school year) - Alta Mesa Elementary.
https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/schoolsearch/school_detail.asp?Search=1&InstName=Alta+Mesa+Eleme ntary&City=redding&SchoolType=1&SchoolType=2&SchoolType=3&SchoolType=4&SpecificSchlTy pes=all&IncGrade=-1&LoGrade=-1&HiGrade=-1&ID=061281001439 ––––––. 2023f, January 15 (Accessed). School Directory Information (2021 -2022 school year) - Enterprise Elementary.
https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/schoolsearch/school_detail.asp?Search=1&InstName=Boulder+Creek+Ele mentary&City=redding&SchoolType=1&SchoolType=2&SchoolType=3&SchoolType=4&SpecificSch lTypes=all&IncGrade=-1&LoGrade=-1&HiGrade=-1&ID=061281002810 ––––––. 2023g, January 15 (Accessed). School Directory Information (2021-2022 school year) - Lassen View Elementary.
https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/schoolsearch/school_detail.asp?Search=1&InstName=Lassen+View+Elem entary&City=redding&SchoolType=1&SchoolType=2&SchoolType=3&SchoolType=4&SpecificSchlT ypes=all&IncGrade=-1&LoGrade=-1&HiGrade=-1&ID=061281001440 ––––––. 2023h, January 15 (Accessed). School Directory Information (2021 -2022 school year) - Mistletoe Elementary.
https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/schoolsearch/school_detail.asp?Search=1&InstName=Mistletoe+Element ary&City=redding&SchoolType=1&SchoolType=2&SchoolType=3&SchoolType=4&SpecificSchlType s=all&IncGrade=-1&LoGrade=-1&HiGrade=-1&ID=061281001441 ––––––. 2023i, January 15 (Accessed). School Directory Information (2021 -2022 school year) - PACE Academy Charter.
https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/schoolsearch/school_detail.asp?Search=1&InstName=PACE+Academy&Ci ty=redding&SchoolType=1&SchoolType=2&SchoolType=3&SchoolType=4&SpecificSchlTypes=all&I ncGrade=-1&LoGrade=-1&HiGrade=-1&ID=061281014194
––––––. 2023j, January 15 (Accessed). School Directory Information (2021 -2022 school year) - Parsons Junior High.
https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/schoolsearch/school_detail.asp?Search=1&InstName=Parsons+Jr .+High& City=redding&SchoolType=1&SchoolType=2&SchoolType=3&SchoolType=4&SpecificSchlTypes=all &IncGrade=-1&LoGrade=-1&HiGrade=-1&ID=061281001442
Packet Pg. 1421
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
PUBLIC SERVICES, PARKS, AND RECREATION
PLACEWORKS 5.15-75
––––––. 2023k, January 15 (Accessed). School Directory Information (2021 -2022 school year) - Redding Collegiate Academy.
https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/schoolsearch/school_detail.asp?Search=1&InstName=Redding+Collegiat e+Academy&City=redding&SchoolType=1&SchoolType=2&SchoolType=3&SchoolType=4&Specific SchlTypes=all&IncGrade=-1&LoGrade=-1&HiGrade=-1&ID=061281014193 ––––––. 2023l, January 15 (Accessed). School Directory Information (2021 -2022 school year) - Rother Elementary.
https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/schoolsearch/school_detail.asp?Search=1&InstName=Rother+Elementar y&City=redding&SchoolType=1&SchoolType=2&SchoolType=3&SchoolType=4&SpecificSchlTypes= all&IncGrade=-1&LoGrade=-1&HiGrade=-1&ID=061281001443
––––––. 2023m, January 15 (Accessed). School Directory Information (2021 -2022 school year) - Shasta Meadows Elementary.
https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/schoolsearch/school_detail.asp?Search=1&InstName=Shasta+Meadows+ Elementary&City=redding&SchoolType=1&SchoolType=2&SchoolType=3&SchoolType=4&Specific SchlTypes=all&IncGrade=-1&LoGrade=-1&HiGrade=-1&ID=061281001444 ––––––. 2023n, January 15 (Accessed). School Directory Information (2021 -2022 school year) - Buckeye School of the Arts.
https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/schoolsearch/school_detail.asp?Search=1&InstName=Buckeye+School+o f+the+Arts&City=redding&SchoolType=1&SchoolType=2&SchoolType=3&SchoolType=4&SpecificS chlTypes=all&IncGrade=-1&LoGrade=-1&HiGrade=-1&ID=061495001682 ––––––. 2023o, January 15 (Accessed). School Directory Information (2021 -2022 school year) - Gateway Educational Options Report.
https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/schoolsearch/school_detail.asp?Search=1&InstName=Gateway+Educatio nal+Options&City=redding&SchoolType=1&SchoolType=2&SchoolType=3&SchoolType=4&Specific SchlTypes=all&IncGrade=-1&LoGrade=-1&HiGrade=-1&ID=061495001636 ––––––. 2023p, January 15 (Accessed). School Directory Information (2021-2022 school year) - Rocky Point Charter .
https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/schoolsearch/school_detail.asp?Search=1&InstName=Rocky+Point+Chart er&City=redding&SchoolType=1&SchoolType=2&SchoolType=3&SchoolType=4&SpecificSchlTypes =all&IncGrade=-1&LoGrade=-1&HiGrade=-1&ID=060246311927
––––––. 2023q, January 15 (Accessed). School Directory Information (2021 -2022 school year) - Grant Elementary.
https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/schoolsearch/school_detail.asp?Search=1&InstName=Grant+Elementary &City=redding&SchoolType=1&SchoolType=2&SchoolType=3&SchoolType=4&SpecificSchlTypes=a ll&IncGrade=-1&LoGrade=-1&HiGrade=-1&ID=061569001980
Packet Pg. 1422
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
PUBLIC SERVICES, PARKS, AND RECREATION
5.15-76 FEBRUARY 2024
––––––. 2023r, January 15 (Accessed). School Directory Information (2021 -2022 school year) - Pacheco Elementary.
https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/schoolsearch/school_detail.asp?Search=1&InstName=Pacheco+Elementa ry&City=redding&SchoolType=1&SchoolType=2&SchoolType=3&SchoolType=4&SpecificSchlTypes =all&IncGrade=-1&LoGrade=-1&HiGrade=-1&ID=062928004522
––––––. 2023s, January 15 (Accessed). School Directory Information (2021-2022 school year) - Bonny View Elementary.
https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/schoolsearch/school_detail.asp?Search=1&InstName=Bonny+View+Elem entary&City=redding&SchoolType=1&SchoolType=2&SchoolType=3&SchoolType=4&SpecificSchlT ypes=all&IncGrade=-1&LoGrade=-1&HiGrade=-1&ID=063204004925 ––––––. 2023t, January 15 (Accessed). School Directory Information (2021 -2022 school year) - Cypress Elementary.
https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/schoolsearch/school_detail.asp?Search=1&InstName=Cypress+Elementa ry&City=redding&SchoolType=1&SchoolType=2&SchoolType=3&SchoolType=4&SpecificSchlTypes =all&IncGrade=-1&LoGrade=-1&HiGrade=-1&ID=063204004926
––––––. 2023u, January 15 (Accessed). School Directory Information (2021 -2022 school year) - Manzanita Elementary.
https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/schoolsearch/school_detail.asp?Search=1&InstName=Manzanita+Eleme ntary&City=redding&SchoolType=1&SchoolType=2&SchoolType=3&SchoolType=4&SpecificSchlTy pes=all&IncGrade=-1&LoGrade=-1&HiGrade=-1&ID=063204004928 ––––––. 2023v, January 15 (Accessed). School Directory Information (2021 -2022 school year) - Monarch Learning Center.
https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/schoolsearch/school_detail.asp?Search=1&InstName=Monarch+Learning +Center&City=redding&SchoolType=1&SchoolType=2&SchoolType=3&SchoolType=4&SpecificSchl Types=all&IncGrade=-1&LoGrade=-1&HiGrade=-1&ID=060199708636 ––––––. 2023w, January 15 (Accessed). School Directory Information (2021 -2022 school year) - Sequoia Middle.
https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/schoolsearch/school_detail.asp?Search=1&InstName=Sequoia+Middle& City=redding&SchoolType=1&SchoolType=2&SchoolType=3&SchoolType=4&SpecificSchlTypes=all &IncGrade=-1&LoGrade=-1&HiGrade=-1&ID=063204004929
––––––. 2023x, January 15 (Accessed). School Directory Information (2021 -2022 school year) - Stellar Charter.
https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/schoolsearch/school_detail.asp?Search=1&InstName=Stellar+Charter&Ci ty=redding&SchoolType=1&SchoolType=2&SchoolType=3&SchoolType=4&SpecificSchlTypes=all&I ncGrade=-1&LoGrade=-1&HiGrade=-1&ID=063204014118
Packet Pg. 1423
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
PUBLIC SERVICES, PARKS, AND RECREATION
PLACEWORKS 5.15-77
––––––. 2023y, January 15 (Accessed). School Directory Information (2021 -2022 school year) - Sycamore Elementary.
https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/schoolsearch/school_detail.asp?Search=1&InstName=Monarch+Learning +Center&City=redding&SchoolType=1&SchoolType=2&SchoolType=3&SchoolType=4&SpecificSchl Types=all&IncGrade=-1&LoGrade=-1&HiGrade=-1&ID=060199708636 ––––––. 2023z, January 15 (Accessed). School Directory Information (2021 -2022 school year) - Turtle Bay. https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/schoolsearch/school_detail.asp?Search=1&InstName=Turtle+Bay&City=r edding&SchoolType=1&SchoolType=2&SchoolType=3&SchoolType=4&SpecificSchlTypes=all&IncG rade=-1&LoGrade=-1&HiGrade=-1&ID=063204009182
––––––. 2023aa, January 15 (Accessed). School Directory Information (2021 -2022 school year) - Redding STEM Academy.
https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/schoolsearch/school_detail.asp?Search=1&InstName=Redding+STEM+Ac ademy&City=redding&SchoolType=1&SchoolType=2&SchoolType=3&SchoolType=4&SpecificSchlT ypes=all&IncGrade=-1&LoGrade=-1&HiGrade=-1&ID=060159513960 ––––––. 2023ab, January 15 (Accessed). School Directory Information (2021 -2022 school year) - Shasta County Juvenile Court.
https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/schoolsearch/school_detail.asp?Search=1&InstName=Juvenile+Court+&C ity=redding&SchoolType=1&SchoolType=2&SchoolType=3&SchoolType=4&SpecificSchlTypes=all& IncGrade=-1&LoGrade=-1&HiGrade=-1&ID=069103702799
––––––. 2023ac, January 15 (Accessed). School Directory Information (2021 -2022 school year) - Shasta County Independent Study.
https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/schoolsearch/school_detail.asp?Search=1&InstName=Shasta+County+In dependent+Study&City=redding&SchoolType=1&SchoolType=2&SchoolType=3&SchoolType=4&S pecificSchlTypes=all&IncGrade=-1&LoGrade=-1&HiGrade=-1&ID=069103712305 ––––––. 2023ad, January 15 (Accessed). School Directory Information (2021-2022 school year) - Enterprise High.
https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/schoolsearch/school_detail.asp?Search=1&InstName=Enterprise+High&C ity=redding&SchoolType=1&SchoolType=2&SchoolType=3&SchoolType=4&SpecificSchlTypes=all& IncGrade=-1&LoGrade=-1&HiGrade=-1&ID=063660006210
––––––. 2023ae, January 15 (Accessed). School Directory Information (2021 -2022 school year) - Pioneer Continuation High.
https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/schoolsearch/school_detail.asp?Search=1&InstName=Pioneer+Continuat ion+High&City=redding&SchoolType=1&SchoolType=2&SchoolType=3&SchoolType=4&SpecificSc hlTypes=all&IncGrade=-1&LoGrade=-1&HiGrade=-1&ID=063660008637 Packet Pg. 1424
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
PUBLIC SERVICES, PARKS, AND RECREATION
5.15-78 FEBRUARY 2024
––––––. 2023af, January 15 (Accessed). School Directory Information (2021 -2022 school year) - Shasta Charter Academy.
https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/schoolsearch/school_detail.asp?Search=1&InstName=Shasta+Charter+Ac ademy&City=redding&SchoolType=1&SchoolType=2&SchoolType=3&SchoolType=4&SpecificSchlT ypes=all&IncGrade=-1&LoGrade=-1&HiGrade=-1&ID=060230608391 ––––––. 2023ag, January 15 (Accessed). School Directory Information (2021 -2022 school year) - Shasta Collegiate Academy.
https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/schoolsearch/school_detail.asp?Search=1&InstName=Shasta+Collegiate+ Academy&City=redding&SchoolType=1&SchoolType=2&SchoolType=3&SchoolType=4&SpecificSc hlTypes=all&IncGrade=-1&LoGrade=-1&HiGrade=-1&ID=063660010676 ––––––. 2023ah, January 15 (Accessed). School Directory Information (2021 -2022 school year) - Shasta High.
https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/schoolsearch/school_detail.asp?Search=1&InstName=Shasta+High&City= redding&SchoolType=1&SchoolType=2&SchoolType=3&SchoolType=4&SpecificSchlTypes=all&Inc Grade=-1&LoGrade=-1&HiGrade=-1&ID=063660006213
––––––. 2023ai, January 15 (Accessed). School Directory Information (2021 -2022 school year) - University Preparatory.
https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/schoolsearch/school_detail.asp?Search=1&InstName=University+Prepara tory&City=redding&SchoolType=1&SchoolType=2&SchoolType=3&SchoolType=4&SpecificSchlTyp es=all&IncGrade=-1&LoGrade=-1&HiGrade=-1&ID=060175911467 Redding, City of. 2019, March 5. Development Impact Mitigation Fee Nexus Study. https://www.cityofredding.org/home/showpublisheddocument/24022/637286095294630000 ––––––. 2021. Capital Improvement Plan 2021 -2026.
https://www.cityofredding.org/home/showpublisheddocument/26734/637763011006830000 ––––––. 2022a, January 9 (Accessed). Ready for Wildfire. https://cityofredding.civilspace.io/en/projects/ready-for-wildfire ––––––. 2022b, July 1. City of Redding Impact Fees.
https://www.cityofredding.org/home/showpublisheddocument/28035/637965037777330000 ––––––. 2022c. City of Redding Biennial Budget 2021 – 2023. https://www.cityofredding.org/home/showpublisheddocument/26110/637638572251430000 ––––––. 2023a, January 19. Kutras Park.
https://www.cityofredding.org/Home/Components/FacilityDirectory/FacilityDirectory/146/36?ba Packet Pg. 1425
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
PUBLIC SERVICES, PARKS, AND RECREATION
PLACEWORKS 5.15-79
cklist=%2fdepartments%2fparks-and-recreation%2fparks%2fpark-finder%2f-npage-2%2f-point- _40%40549778178648936_-122%4044972523318806_10%40027113922761126 ––––––. 2023b, January 19. Henderson Open Space.
https://www.cityofredding.org/Home/Components/FacilityDirectory/FacilityDirectory/120/36?ba cklist=%2fdepartments%2fparks-and-recreation%2fparks%2fpark-finder%2f-npage-2%2f-point- _40%40549778178648936_-122%4044972523318806_10%40027113922761126 ––––––. 2023c, January 19. Mountain View Middle School. https://www.cityofredding.org/Home/Components/FacilityDirectory/FacilityDirectory/132/36?ba cklist=%2fdepartments%2fparks-and-recreation%2fparks%2fpark-finder%2f-npage-2%2f-point- _40%40549778178648936_-122%4044972523318806_10%40027113922761126 ––––––. 2023d, January 19. Parkview Riverfront Park.
https://www.cityofredding.org/Home/Components/FacilityDirectory/FacilityDirectory/88/36?back list=%2fdepartments%2fparks-and-recreation%2fparks%2fpark-finder%2f-npage-3 ––––––. 2023e, January 19. Sequoia Middle School.
https://www.cityofredding.org/Home/Components/FacilityDirectory/FacilityDirectory/136/36?ba cklist=%2fdepartments%2fparks-and-recreation%2fparks%2fpark-finder%2f-npage-3 ––––––. 2023f, January 19. Parsons Junior High School.
https://www.cityofredding.org/Home/Components/FacilityDirectory/FacilityDirectory/134/36?ba cklist=%2fdepartments%2fparks-and-recreation%2fparks%2fpark-finder%2f-npage-3 ––––––. 2023g, January 19. UPrep.
https://www.cityofredding.org/Home/Components/FacilityDirectory/FacilityDirectory/138/36?ba cklist=%2fdepartments%2fparks-and-recreation%2fparks%2fpark-finder%2f-npage-4 ––––––. 2023h, January 19. Turtle Bay East Park.
https://www.cityofredding.org/Home/Components/FacilityDirectory/FacilityDirectory/148/36?ba cklist=%2fdepartments%2fparks-and-recreation%2fparks%2fpark-finder%2f-npage-3Redding Parks and Recreation. 2018a, August. Parks, Trails, and Open Space Master Plan- Introduction and Summary.
https://www.cityofredding.org/home/showpublisheddocument/20000/636728655614000000 ––––––. 2018b, August. Parks, Trails, and Open Space Master Plan - Parks Strategy. https://www.cityofredding.org/home/showpublisheddocument/19996/636728652909870000 Redding Police Department. 2016, July. Redding Police Department Strategic Plan. https://www.cityofredding.org/home/showdocument?id=10048 Service Provider Questionnaires (Appendix 5.15-1). 2023, May 24.
Packet Pg. 1426
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
PUBLIC SERVICES, PARKS, AND RECREATION
5.15-80 FEBRUARY 2024
Shasta County Office of Education (SCOE). 2023a, January 13 (Accessed). Developer Fee Services. https://www.shastacoe.org/administrative-services-division/business-services/developer-fee- services
––––––. 2023b, January 13 (Accessed). District and School Information. https://www.shastacoe.org/shasta- county-schools/pcs
––––––. 2022. Report to the Community 2022 -2023.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1cFq6YAoM8kctq6WjBa7MB3I5oG0a1A4c/view Shasta Local Agency Formation Commission. 2022, December 2. City of Redding Municipal Services Review & Sphere of Influence Update.
https://www.shastalafco.org/images/Local.Agencies/City_of_Redding_MSR_SOI_Update_Commis sion_Approved_December-2022.pdf
Packet Pg. 1427
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
PLACEWORKS 5.16-1
5.16 TRANSPORTATION
This section of the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) evaluates the potential for implementation of the Redding General Plan Update to impact transportation facilities and circulation in the City of Redding and its sphere of influence (SOI).
5.16.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
REGULATORY FRAMEWORK
State Regulations
California Air Resources Board (CARB), 2020 Mobile Source Strategy In September 2021, CARB published the 2020 Mobile Source Strategy (CARB, 2021). The 2020 Strategy is a framework that identifies actions needed to meet the State’s goals for the reduction of emissions of criteria pollutants, GHGs, and toxic air contaminant s from mobile sources. The 2020 Mobile Source Strategy uses the same targets for reducing VMT as the 2016 Mobile Source Strategy and 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan, which aim to reduce light -duty vehicle VMT by 15 percent by 2050 compared to business as usual.
The 2020 Mobile Source Strategy identifies strategies that CARB can take to assist in achieving additional reductions and support implementation of regional SCSs. The 2020 Mobile Source Strategy identifies eight strategy areas for reducing VMT and are outlined in CARB’s SB 375 Progress Report. The strategy areas are:
1. Increase Transportation Choices and Improve Access
2. Authorize and Implement Equitable Pricing of Transportation
3. Align State Funding Programs to Reduce Vehicle Travel and Achieve the State’s Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction Goals
4. Shape the Deployment of New Mobility Options in Ways That Reduce VMT
5. Better Align Land Use Planning with the Scoping Plan’s Goals
6. Accelerate Infill Housing Production
7. Support Local and Regional Partners to Implement VMT Reduction Measures
8. Elevate the State of Science to Inform the Development and Implementation of Sustainable Community and Transportation Policies
Senate Bill 743
On September 27, 2013, SB 743 was signed into law, starting a process that fundamentally changed transportation impact analysis as part of CEQA compliance. SB 743 generally eliminates auto delay, LOS, and other similar measures vehicular capacity or traffic congestion as the sole basis for determining significant impacts under CEQA. Pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines, the new criteria “shall promote the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, the development of multimodal transportation networks, and a diversity of land uses” (Public Resources Code Section 21099(b)(1)).
Packet Pg. 1428
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
5.16-2 FEBR UAR Y 2024
Pursuant to SB 743, the Natural Resources Agency adopted revisions to the CEQA Guidelines to implement SB 743 on December 28, 2018. The revised CEQA Guidelines establish new criteria for determining the significance of transportation impacts. Under the new Guidelines, VMT-related metric(s) that evaluate the significance of transportation-related impacts under CEQA for land use are required beginning on July 1, 2020. The legislation does not preclude the application of local general plan policies, zoning cod es, conditions of approval, or any other planning requirements that require evaluation of LOS, but these metrics may no longer constitute the basis for determining transportation impacts under the CEQA.
Regional Regulations
2018 Regional Transportation Plan for Shasta County
Shasta Regional Transportation Agency (SRTA) is the federally -designated metropolitan planning organization (MPO) and state-designated regional transportation planning agency (RTPA) for Shasta County.
SRTA is required to prepare and adopt a comprehensive regional transportation plan (RTP) covering a minimum 20-year planning horizon. The RTP for Shasta County is updated every four years.
SRTA prepared the 2018 RTP/SCS as required by Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Title 450.300, Subpart C and California Government Code Section 65080 et seq. The RTP is a comprehensive plan that addresses all modes of transportation used by people and for goods and freight movement (i.e., streets/roads, public transit, pedestrian and bicycle facilities, aviation, and rail) in the Shasta Region (SRTA 2018). The 2018 RTP includes the following goals:
▪ Goal 1: Optimize the use of existing interregional and regionally significant roadways to prolong functionality and maximize return-on-investment.
▪ Goal 2: Strategically increase capacity on interregional and regionally significant roadways to keep people and freight moving effectively and efficiently.
▪ Goal 3: Provide an integrated, context-appropriate range of practical transportation choices. ▪ Goal 4: Create people-centered communities that support public safety, health, and well-being. ▪ Goal 5: Strengthen regional economic competitiveness for long-term prosperity. ▪ Goal 6: Promote public access, awareness, and action in planning and decision-making processes. ▪ Goal 7: Practice and promote environmental and natural resource stewardship.
The RTP must be fiscally constrained, meaning that the projects and programs identified in the RTP and subjected to environmental review must be consistent with reasonably anticipated revenue over the 20 - year planning horizon of the RTP . The SCS for reducing per capita GHG emissions must also be fiscally constrained.
The 2018 RTP includes an updated SCS as required by the Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act of 2008 (SB 375), which demonstrates how the region will meet the GHG emissions reduction targets Packet Pg. 1429
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
PLACEWORKS 5.16-3
established by CARB. CARB established emission reduction targets for California’s eighteen MPO regions for the year 2020 and 2035. Shasta County was assigned a 0% per capita change when compared to the 2005 baseline year, and the 2018 RTP/SCS reflects this target. The 2022 update to the RTP/SCS is currently underway.
On March 28, 2018, CARB adopted a target for the Shasta region of reducing per capita GHG emissions from passenger vehicles by 4% by the year 2035, when compared to a baseline year of 2005. The 2022 RTP/SCS update will be based on this target. The GHG reduction targets are periodically reviewed and updated by CARB based on progress toward meeting the targets and best available information. In preparation for the 2022 update, SRTA prepared a report entitled “Ways and Means – a Four-Year Progress Report on Mobility in the Shasta Region” that identifies progress toward short -term (2018-2022) goals identified in the 2018 RTP , and new short-term goals being considered for the 2022 RTP (SRTA 2021). One strategy that has been developed in other communities that will be considered for inclusion in the 2022 RTP is establishing a VMT mitigation bank from which developers may purchase credits to mitigate for automobile traffic generated by their projects.
Local Regulations
2000-2020 Redding General Plan
The following policies are included in the existing General Plan regarding transportation. The numbering is from the existing General Plan and therefore may not be consecutive.
Air Quality Element
▪ Goal 1 : Effective communication, cooperation, and coordination in developing and implementing community and regional air quality programs. o Policy 9 Transit Planning: The City should consult with transit providers to determine project impacts on long-range transit plans and ensure that impacts are mitigated. o Policy 10 Consolidation of Transit Services : The City should continue to support the upgrading and consolidation of transit services within the metropolitan area to maximize the efficiency of transit services while minimizing the costs of transit services.
This policy would also apply to small transit providers serving special groups like seniors.
Consolidating these services c an increase ridership per vehicle and reduce miles traveled.
o Policy 11 Transit and Affordable Housing : The City should work with the Housing Authority, transit providers, and developers to accommodate the construction of low- income housing developments that use transit -oriented and pedestrian -oriented design principles.
o Policy 13 New Transportation Technology: The City should anticipate new technology in transportation so that opportunities are not foreclosed by relying on old technology.
Packet Pg. 1430
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
5.16-4 FEBR UAR Y 2024
o Policy 14 Trip-Reduction Programs: The City will, as much as possible, take the lead in implementing innovative employer -based, trip reduction programs by ensuring that employment contracts negotiated with unions are flexible and allow workers to participate in programs that reduce commute trips.
o Policy 16 Teleconferencing and Telework Centers : The City should support the development of a teleconference center for the community and small telecommunication work centers in new development. This can be accomplished by working with the telephone company and other interested public and private agencies, developers, and hotel operators in developing a multi-user teleconferencing center and small telework centers.
▪ Goal 2 : Reduce motor vehicle trips and vehicle miles traveled and increase average vehicle ridership.
o Policy 17 Transit and Pedestrian -Oriented Design Guidelines : The City shall make air quality and mobility prime considerations when reviewing any proposed change to the land-use pattern. Such consideration shall include, as much as possible, increased transit and pedestrian mobility. This step shall be part of the CEQA process and apply reasonable Best Available Mitigation Measures (BAMM) to projects that exceed the significance thresholds promulgated by the Air Quality Management District. o Policy 18 High Density and Transit: The City shall, as much as possible, continue to plan high-density development in areas that can be fitted with a transit system. o Policy 19 Mixed Use—Bicyclists and Pedestrians: The City shall continue to encourage mixed-use developments near employment centers that provide commercial services such as day-care centers, restaurants, banks, and stores. o Policy 20 Funding for Pedestrian and Bicyclist Mobility: The City should provide funding opportunities and options for the development of pedestrian and bicyclist corridor construction.
o Policy 21 Parking and Multi -modal Transfer Sites: The City will work with the Redding Area Bus Authority in planning multi-modal transfer sites that incorporate auto parking areas, bike parking, transit, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and park and ride pick -up points.
o Policy 26 Pedestrian, Bicycle, and Transit Funding : The City should ensure that state and federal funds earmarked for bicycle and transit improvements are used for those purposes and vigorously pursue funds for new bicycle and transit improvements. o Policy 27 Bus Turnouts and Shelters : As a condition of project approval, the City shall require dedication of land for bus turnouts and shelters at sites deemed appropriate and necessary.
Packet Pg. 1431
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
PLACEWORKS 5.16-5
o Policy 28 Bikeway and Pedestrian Plan: The City shall ensure that the Regional Bikeway Plan and the City's Comprehensive Bikeway Plan include a comprehensive system of bikeways and pedestrian paths, which is planned and constructed in accordance with the adopted plan, based on analysis of existing and future use by the area to be served.
Public Facilities and Services Element
▪ Goal PF11: Maintain, and expand when necessary, a street system that allows all users to travel smoothly and safety.
o Policy PF11A: Establish the following thresholds for streets and intersections:
▪ Maintain a Level of Service "C" on all City roadways and intersections, except at those locations identified within the Transportation Element, where a LOS "D" is appropriate.
▪ Major arterials and intersections should be programmed for ultimate lane improvements five years in advance of projections showing LOS declines below adopted standards.
o Policy PF11B: Establish a program and funding mechanism to complete portions of arterials that were not constructed to ultimate lane widths in conjunction with adjacent development and now create irregular links or capacity constraints within the system.
o Policy PF11C: Reconstruct existing streets as appropriate to comply with current design standards, when funding becomes available. Such improvements may include, but are not limited to: paving, curbs, gutters, sidewalks, signage, landscaping, lighting, raised medians, bikeways and bus pullouts.
o Policy PF11D: Establish a program to conduct periodic street maintenance activities such as slurry seals, overlays, and pavement reconstruction to optimize public expenditures and level of service.
o Policy PF11E : Develop a program to establish street "plan lines" for future street extensions noted in the Transportation Element.
▪ Goal PF13: Provide an efficient and reliable public transit system that serves all sectors of the community.
o Policy PF13A: Establish the following threshold for transit-related facilities:
o Work to balance required fare box ratios with the desire to reduce headways on principal routes to one-half hour to encourage ridership. o Policy PF13B : Complete all planned phases of the City’s central intermodal transfer facility. Encourage relocation of the existing Greyhound Terminal to the RABA site.
Packet Pg. 1432
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
5.16-6 FEBR UAR Y 2024
o Policy PF13C: Establish secondary transfer facilities at strategic locations throughout the City.
o Policy PF13D : Pursue the establishment of Park -n-Ride facilities as appropriate throughout the community. These activities may include delineation of such facilities within underutilized parking lots.
o Policy PF13E: Consider utilizing impact fees to finance transit facilities and services.
Transportation Element
▪ Policy T1A: Ensure that multimodal infrastructure improves transportation choices for pedestrians, bicyclists, motorists, and public transportation riders of all ages and abilities and that all users are considered and included in the planning, design, approval, construction, and operation of new streets, and the alteration and maintenance phases of existing streets by:
o Including infrastructure that promotes a safe means of travel for all users along the right of way, such as sidewalks, shared-use paths, bicycle lanes, and paved shoulders. o Provide pedestrian and bike connections from developments to adjacent main streets, open space areas, parks, transit stops, schools, commercial and employment centers, and other activity centers as opportunities arise.
o Designing new development to incorporate street connectivity for all users. Including new or alteration of existing infrastructure that facilitates safe crossing of the right-of-way for all users, such as: accessible curb ramps, high -visibility crosswalks, pedestrian refuge islands, smaller curb radii, corner bulbouts, pedestrian signals, and bicycle detection at traffic signals where warranted.
o Incorporating street design features and techniques that promote safe and comfortable travel along streets by pedestrians, bicyclists, and public transportation riders. Examples include:
constructing traffic -calming mechanisms in neighborhoods; providing p edestrian refuge medians on busy streets; reducing the number of motor vehicle lanes and/or widths where appropriate; providing transit turnouts; and constructing physical buffers and separations between vehicular traffic and other users.
o Providing features that improve the comfort, convenience, and safety of users such as pedestrian-oriented/wayfinding signs, pedestrian-scale lighting, benches and other street furniture, bicycle parking facilities, comfortable and attractive public transportation stops and facilities, street trees, landscape, and planting strips. ▪ Policy T2A: Identify and prioritize physical improvements that would make bicycle and pedestrian travel safer along current key bicycling and walking routes. Establish an implementation strategy to construct needed improvements. Undertake improvements as part of stre et projects where feasible.
Packet Pg. 1433
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
PLACEWORKS 5.16-7
▪ Policy T2B: Identify intersections and other locations where collisions have occurred or that present safety challenges for pedestrians, bicyclists, or other users, including, but not limited to, intersections within one mile of schools; consider gathering additional data through methods such as walkability/bikeability audits.
▪ Policy T2C: Ensure that the transportation capital improvement program and other budgetary tools include funding for Complete Streets infrastructure to the fullest feasible extent. Utilize grant funds and other funding sources to augment City resources. Undertake street modifications with existing capital projects such as overlays, sidewalk repair, ADA curb ramps, and similar projects to reduce costs while providing multimodal accessibility.
▪ Policy T3A: Review the City's construction standards for streets, intersections, pedestrian facilities, bicycle facilities, and transit facilities and revise as necessary to incorporate Complete Streets standards that support all users.
▪ Policy T3B: Consider establishing Multimodal Level of Service Criteria, including pedestrians and cyclists to guide development of the street network.
▪ Policy T3C: Collaborate with the Redding Area Bus Authority (RABA) to incorporate infrastructure to assist users in employing multiple means of transportation in a single trip in order to increase transportation access and flexibility. Examples include, but are not limited to, provisions for bicycle access on public transportation, secure bicycle racks at transit stops, and public transportation access to trails and recreational locations.
▪ Policy T3D: Consider development of a Complete Streets Design Manual that can serve as a guide for public and private development projects that propose new streets or modifications of existing streets.
▪ Policy T3E : Encourage new development in close proximity to existing employment, housing, schools, commercial centers, and other services and amenities. ▪ Policy T4A : Undertake targeted outreach and public participation in community decisions concerning street design and use.
▪ Policy T4B : In collaboration with Shasta County, City of Anderson, City of Shasta Lake, and the Regional Transportation Planning Agency, integrate bicycle, pedestrian, and public transportation facility planning into regional and local transportation planning programs to encourage connectivity between jurisdictions. Encourage coordination among these agencies to develop joint prioritization, capital planning and programming, and implementation of street improvement projects and programs.
▪ Policy T5A: Establish the following peak-hour LOS standards for transportation planning and project review. They reflect the special circumstances of various areas of the community, as depicted in Figure 2-1 (of the 2000 General Plan):
o Use LOS "C"—"acceptable delays"—for most arterial streets and their intersections.
Packet Pg. 1434
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
5.16-8 FEBR UAR Y 2024
o Use LOS "D"—"tolerable delays"—for the Downtown area where vitality, activity, and pedestrian and transit use are primary goals.
o Use LOS "D" —"tolerable delays"—for streets within the state highway system and interchanges.
o Use LOS "D"—"tolerable delays"—for river-crossing street corridors whose capacity is affected by adjacent intersections.
▪ Policy T5B : Require development projects to construct both on - and off -site improvements as necessary to mitigate the effects of increased traffic generated by the project and maintain peak - hour LOS standards established by Policy T1A. The traffic analysis used to es tablish mitigating measures shall be based on the City’s Traffic Model or other City-approved method. Improvements may be deferred by the City upon approval of a Deferred Improvement Plan which identifies improvements needed, costs, funding sources, and other pertinent data required by the City. ▪ Policy T5C: Obtain needed street right -of-way dedications with ministerial projects and with the approval of subdivisions, use permits, and other discretionary actions. ▪ Policy T5D: Encourage employers to provide incentives for employees utilizing alternatives to the single occupant automobile, such as carpools, van pools, buses, bicycling, and walking. ▪ Policy T5E: Encourage employers, including government agencies, to allow telecommuting and flex time and to promote staggered shifts or base work hours that do not coincide with peak -period traffic to reduce peak-hour trips.
▪ Policy T5F: Route through truck traffic around existing and future residential neighborhoods and incompatible commercial areas to the extent feasible.
▪ Policy T5G: Continue to utilize signage and enforcement to clearly demonstrate the City's intent to reduce truck traffic and parking in residential districts. ▪ Policy T6A: Retain alleys in the Downtown area to provide pedestrian circulation and convenient service access to local businesses.
▪ Policy T6B : Establish motorized and/or non -motorized transportation linkages to connect Downtown Redding to the Park Marina, Turtle Bay, and Civic Center areas; augment the transit system to establish frequent and convenient access to these destination areas. ▪ Policy T7A: Establish a system of street cross-sections that will:
o Accommodate all improvements necessary to handle forecasted volumes at adopted LOS standards.
o Accommodate bicycles and transit facilities.
o Attain the design objectives for streets as addressed in the Community Development and Design Element.
Packet Pg. 1435
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
PLACEWORKS 5.16-9
▪ Policy T7B : Require streets to be dedicated and improved in accordance with adopted street standards; allow modifications to standard street sections when approved by the Planning Commission and City Engineer .
▪ Policy T7C: Maximize intersection and driveway spacing on arterial and collector streets. Require shared/common driveways wherever feasible.
▪ Policy T7D : Provide right-turn lanes for arterial -to-arterial and arterial -to-collector intersections wherever feasible.
▪ Policy T7E: Pursue financing in a timely manner for all components of the transportation system to achieve and maintain adopted level of service standards. ▪ Policy T7F . Assess fees on new development sufficient to cover the fair share portion of that development's impacts on the local and regional transportation system. Exceptions may be when new development generates significant public benefits (e.g., low -income housing, primary-wage- earner employment), and alternative sources of funding for the improvements can be obtained to offset foregone revenues.
▪ Policy T9A : Develop neighborhood protection plans when traffic studies or monitoring confirm excessive traffic volumes, substantial through traffic, speeding, or accidents in specific residential areas.
▪ Policy T9B: Emphasize the use of landscape and other visual deterrents to through traffic; install physical measures only as a last resort.
▪ Policy T9C: Establish street design standards and review criteria intended to avoid the creation of local streets that will encourage excessive speed and/or which will ultimately function as collectors.
Factors that may contribute to a local street functioning as a collector include: < Excessive length (typically greater than one-half mile).
o Excessive width.
o The lack of other streets which may be used to convey traffic to nearby arterials. ▪ Policy T9D : Encourage new neighborhoods to incorporate detached sidewalks and to establish landscape "parkways" between the curb and sidewalk. Continuous and consistent tree-planting to form canopy closure is encouraged.
▪ Policy T9E: Route through traffic around the perimeters of neighborhoods where possible. ▪ Policy T10A: Provide pedestrian-oriented features, such as benches, enhanced landscape, and trash receptacles, in commercial areas, particularly in the Downtown and Park Marina areas. ▪ Policy T12A : Develop and maintain a Comprehensive Bikeway Plan geared to establishing an integrated bicycle system.
▪ Policy T12B : Incorporate facilities suitable for bicycle use in the design of interchanges, intersections, and other street-improvement/maintenance projects.
Packet Pg. 1436
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
5.16-10 FEBR UAR Y 2024
▪ Policy T12C: Make improvements to streets, signs, and traffic signals as needed to improve bicycle travel.
▪ Policy T12D: Keep bikeways free of overhanging shrubbery, debris, and other obstacles. ▪ Policy T12E: Install bicycle parking in the Downtown area and at City parks, civic buildings, and other community centers.
▪ Policy T12F: Support the efforts of the Redding Area Bus Authority (RABA) to provide bicycle racks on all buses within the system.
▪ Policy T12G: Require new development to provide bicycle facilities or pay in-lieu fees based on the fair share of that development’s impacts on the bikeway system and needs identified on the Comprehensive Bikeway Plan.
▪ Policy T13A : Support the continuation and expansion of private commercial bus operations to provide additional regional transit opportunities for residents. ▪ Policy T13B: Work with the Redding Area Bus Authority (RABA) on an ongoing basis to plan and implement additional transit services that are timely, cost-effective, responsive to growth patterns, and meet the needs of existing and future transit demand. ▪ Policy T13C : Provide bus pull -outs along arterial streets at approximately ¼ -mile intervals or as indicated in the Shasta County Transit Development Plan. Determine the precise locations during development plan review or at the time of major street improvement or reconstruction. ▪ Policy T13D: Require development to install passenger amenities at designated bus stops when identified as a mitigating measure.
▪ Policy T13E : Provide attractive, well -lighted, comfortable, and protected waiting areas for bus passengers.
▪ Policy T13F : Promote coordination of transit and air transportation services to enhance the transportation options available for residents and visitors to the Redding community. ▪ Policy T14A : Continue to plan and develop the Redding Municipal Airport to maximize its contributions to business efficiency, economic development, and recreational opportunities within the region.
▪ Policy T14B: Encourage the establishment of additional commercial airline providers at the Redding Municipal Airport to provide the widest range of aviation travel choices to residents and businesses within the region.
▪ Policy T14C : Support Benton Airpark as a public -use, general aviation airport and commercial reliever facility for the Redding Municipal Airport.
Packet Pg. 1437
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
PLACEWORKS 5.16-11
▪ Policy T14D: Protect existing and planned local air transportation facilities from encroachment by potentially incompatible land uses and require developers to file an avigation easement with the City if a proposed development or expansion of an existing use is located in the area subject to the overlay district.
▪ Policy T15A: Support efforts to establish convenient rail transit service between Redding and the Sacramento area.
▪ Policy T15B: Encourage the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) and Amtrak to increase passenger service by expanding rail schedules to include a greater number of stops and range of connection times and by providing safe and comfortable station facilities. ▪ Policy T15C: Protect existing rail alignments and facilities through zoning from encroachment by potentially incompatible land uses.
▪ Policy T15D: Work with UPRR to identify any surplus right of -way that may be suitable for parking or other facilities associated with a future light rail system.
Traffic Impact Fee
The City of Redding adopted the current Citywide Transportation Development Impact Fee Program (TIF) as part of the comprehensive fee study in 2000 (Redding 2018a). The Development Impact Fee program is contained in Section 16.20.160, Citywide transportation development impact fee, of the Redding Municipal Code. The Citywide traffic impact fees are calculated based on the development type and expected trips derived from the Institute of Transportation Engineer’s Trip Generation Manual (Redding 2022a). The City also implements traffic impact fees for development in two areas of the City including Dana Drive (16.20.170) and the N orth Redding Traffic Benefit District (NRTBD) (16.20.180). Traffic impact fees for development within the Downtown Specific Plan area are calculated separately to reflect lower trip - generation rates and shorter trip lengths (Redding 2017). These fees where last updated in July 2022 and are shown in Table 5.16-1, Redding Transportation Impact Fees.
Packet Pg. 1438
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
5.16-12 FEBR UAR Y 2024
TABLE 5.16-1 REDDING TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEES
Fee Type Fee per unit (July 2022)
City-wide Traffic Impact Fees1
Single Family Detached Housing $7,036
Low-Rise Multifamily Housing $3,870
General Office Building $7,880
Shopping Center $8,077
General Light Industrial $5,770
Impact Fee within Downtown Specific Plan1
Single Family Detached Housing $4,925
Low-Rise Multifamily Housing $2,709
General Light Industrial $4,039
North Redding Traffic Benefit District Fees2
Single family (per DU) $5,516
Source: Redding 2022a; 2022b
1Note that this table does not list all Citywide transportation impact fees levied by the City. See the City’s Citywide Transportation Impact Fee schedule for the complete list of fees (Redding 2022a).
2 Development in the NRTBD is levied a combination of the NRTBD fees and the Citywide TIF. The City grants partial credits against the Citywide fee program to avoid double charging development within the District.
Redding Active Transportation Plan (ATP)
The purpose of the Redding ATP foundation is to establish a safe, efficient, comfortable, and connected active transportation network (i.e., pedestrian and bicycle networks/facilities) that is not only used, but intrinsic to the lifestyle of Redding residents and visitors. This plan is an update to the Bikeway Action Plan 2010-2015 and builds on local planning efforts to create safe and vibrant active transportation environments, as documented in the Redding Pedestrian Safety Assessment, Complete Streets Po licy, the Downtown Redding Community Based Transportation Plan, the Draft Downtown Redding Specific Plan Update, and the Parks, Trails, and Open Space Master Pla n (Redding 2018b) . The ATP covers the City’s existing transportation network in addition to goals and actions, planned networks, and implementation strategies.
Redding Municipal Code
Title 11, Vehicles and Traffic, of the Redding Municipal Code regulates traffic signs and signals; traffic on public and private roads; parking restrictions; turning movement restrictions; allowable speed limit under different circumstances; crosswalks and bicycle lanes; as well as many other chapters that deal with traffic restrictions.
Chapter 11.40, Vehicle Congestion Management, of the Redding Municipal Code was adopted to meet the trip reduction and travel demand management ordinance requirements of the countywide Congestion management Program as adopted by the Shasta County Regional Transportation Planning Agency. This Packet Pg. 1439
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
PLACEWORKS 5.16-13
regulation applies to any significant trip generator as defined in Shasta County Air Quality Management District (AQMD) Rule 3:24 and the definitions of Section 11.40.020 of the Code.
Complete Streets Policy
In August of 2012, Redding adopted amendments to the Transportation Element of the General Plan to comply with the Complete Streets Act. Under this policy, the City i n its review of proposed development projects, will ensure that the intent of this Complete Streets policy is implemented by ensuring that the design of the development includes streets that will accommodate all multimodal users of the facility in a safe a nd efficient manner and that appropriate street, pedestrian, and bicycle connections from developments to adjacent main streets, open -space areas, parks, transit stops, schools, employment and commercial centers, and other activity centers are provided. This policy also directs the public works director to establish a program to identify critical pedestrian- and bicycle-route gaps in the transportation network for all roadway users, which categorizes and prioritizes necessary improvements to correct identified deficiencies through street-maintenance programs as funding allows (Redding 2012).
Redding Area Bus Authority Short Range Transit Plan
The Redding Area Bus Authority (RABA) last updated its Short-Range Transit Development Plan (SRTP) i n 2014. The primary purpose of the SRTP is to guide the development of fixed and demand response transit for residents, employees and visitors in the RABA service area over a five year period. The 2014 SRTP discusses the RABA’s existing routes, proposed routes, expenses and funding needs, and trends in ridership.
Redding Local Hazard Mitigation Plan
Under the Federal Disaster Act of 2000, jurisdictions are required to prepare Local Hazard Mitigation Plans (LHMPs) that are subject to state review. The City of Redding LHMP assesses hazard vulnerabilities and identifies mitigation actions that the City will pursue in order to reduce the level of injury, property damage, and community disruption that might otherwise result from such events. The actions address hazards, as well as specific activities for, Wildland Fire, Flood, Hazardous Material, Severe Winter Weather, Earthquakes, Utility Disruption, Aviation Disaster, Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear, Explosives (CBRNE), Dam Overflow or Failure, and Volcanic issues. The most recent update to the City of Redding Local Hazard Mitigation Plan was adopted in 2021 (City of Redding 2023).
Redding Local Road Safety Plan
The Local Road Safety Plan (LRSP) is a requirement for Cycle 11 of the Highway Safety Improvement Program. The LRSP grant application included a citywide analysis of the roadway system in Redding comprising of the current collisions patterns and high -risk roadway characteristics (systemic analysis). The planning process for the document determined priority locations for safety improvements. The document also identifies potential funding opportunities that would help to implement the plan.
Packet Pg. 1440
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
5.16-14 FEBR UAR Y 2024
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Traffic
Daily traffic volumes on key motor vehicle routes within Redding are summarized on Table 5.16-2, Average Daily Traffic in Redding. The primary regional motor vehicle facility is Interstate 5 (I-5) freeway that carries roughly 69,000 daily vehicles near Cypress Street in Redding. Cypress Street carries over 30,000 daily vehicles across the Sacramento River east of downtown, while many of Redding’s key streets carry between 10,000 to 18,000 daily vehicles. Streets with one lane per direction can typically ac commodate roughly 20,000 daily vehicles, while streets with two lanes per direction can accommodate over 30,000 daily vehicles, provided that left-turn pockets are provided where appropriate.
TABLE 5.16-2 AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC IN REDDING
Street / Route Location Avg Daily Traffic
Baseline 2045 Percent Change
Interstate 5 (I-5) N of Twin View Blvd 39,500 51,100 29.37% Interstate 5 (I-5) N of SR-299 / S of Twin View Blvd 46,500 58,100 24.95% Interstate 5 (I-5) N of SR-44 / S of SR-299 60,000 75,000 25.00% Interstate 5 (I-5) S of SR-44 / N of Cypress Ave 69,000 88,600 28.41% Interstate 5 (I-5) S of Cypress Ave / N of Churn Cr Rd 61,000 80,000 31.15% Interstate 5 (I-5) S of Churn Creek Rd 58,000 78,200 34.83% SR-44 E of Butte St / W of I-5 56,000 66,200 18.21%
SR-44 E of I-5 / W of Hilltop Dr 48,000 55,700 16.04%
SR-44 E of Hilltop Dr / W of Victor Ave 37,000 45,900 24.05% SR-44 E of Victor Ave 35,000 39,100 11.71%
SR-44 Shasta View Dr 23,500 29,500 25.53%
SR-44 Airport Rd 16,600 20,600 24.10%
SR-273 N of Lake Blvd 12,700 14,000 10.24%
SR-273 N of Benton Dr/S of Lake Blvd 20,800 23,500 12.98% SR-273 S of Market/Pine 16,800 19,100 13.69%
SR-273 S of Buenaventura Ave 19,200 22,500 17.19%
SR-273 S of S. Bonnyview Rd 21,800 25,000 14.68%
SR-299 W of I-5 / E of SR-273 20,300 25,400 25.12%
SR-299 E of I-5 / W of Hawley Rd 21,000 25,500 21.43%
SR-299 E of Hawley Rd/W of Old Oregon Tr. 11,600 14,100 21.55% SR-299 E of Old Oregon Tr. 9,700 11,000 13.40%
Airport Rd N of Rancho Rd 12,100 16,400 35.54%
Airport Rd S of Rancho Rd 9,900 13,800 39.39%
S. Bonnyview Rd west of I-5 ramps 21,600 26,000 20.37%
S. Bonnyview Rd east of I-5 ramps 23,700 29,300 23.63%
S. Bonnyview Rd west of Churn Creek Rd 21,100 25,700 21.80% Buenaventura Blvd N of Placer St 9,300 10,500 12.90%
Buenaventura Blvd S of Placer St 9,400 11,500 22.34%
California St btw Shasta & Tehama St 6,100 6,700 9.84%
Churn Creek Rd S of SR-299 ramps 13,100 15,800 20.61%
Packet Pg. 1441
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
PLACEWORKS 5.16-15
Street / Route Location Avg Daily Traffic
Baseline 2045 Percent Change
Churn Creek Rd N of S Bonnyview 13,000 14,900 14.62%
Churn Creek Rd E of S Bonnyview 13,400 17,800 32.84%
Cypress Ave W of Hartnell Ave 27,900 35,900 28.67%
Cypress Ave E of Hartnell Ave 19,000 22,200 16.84%
Cypress Ave E of I-5 / W of Hilltop Dr 31,200 36,800 17.95% Cypress Ave E of Hilltop Dr / W of Larkspur Ln 21,000 25,100 19.52% Hartnell Ave W of Bechelli Ln 12,000 12,700 5.83%
Hartnell Ave E of Bechelli Ln 13,600 13,800 1.47%
Hartnell Ave E of Churn Creek Rd 18,400 19,500 5.98%
Hartnell Ave W of Shasta View Dr 10,000 11,400 14.00%
S. Bonnyview Rd east of I-5 ramps 23,700 29,300 23.63%
S. Bonnyview Rd west of Churn Creek Rd 21,100 25,700 21.80% Buenaventura Blvd N of Placer St 9,300 10,500 12.90%
Buenaventura Blvd S of Placer St 9,400 11,500 22.34%
California St btw Shasta & Tehama St 6,100 6,700 9.84%
Churn Creek Rd S of SR-299 ramps 13,100 15,800 20.61%
Churn Creek Rd N of S Bonnyview 13,000 14,900 14.62%
Churn Creek Rd E of S Bonnyview 13,400 17,800 32.84%
Cypress Ave W of Hartnell Ave 27,900 35,900 28.67%
Cypress Ave E of Hartnell Ave 19,000 22,200 16.84%
Cypress Ave E of I-5 / W of Hilltop Dr 31,200 36,800 17.95% Cypress Ave E of Hilltop Dr / W of Larkspur Ln 21,000 25,100 19.52% Hartnell Ave W of Bechelli Ln 12,000 12,700 5.83%
Hartnell Ave E of Bechelli Ln 13,600 13,800 1.47%
Hartnell Ave E of Churn Creek Rd 18,400 19,500 5.98%
Hartnell Ave W of Shasta View Dr 10,000 11,400 14.00%
Hartnell Ave E of Shasta View Dr 5,900 7,100 20.34%
Hawley Rd. N of SR-299 ramps 6,400 7,800 21.88%
Hilltop Ave N of Cypress Ave 12,100 13,300 9.92%
Old Oregon Trail S of SR-299 ramps 7,400 10,100 36.49%
Placer St E of Buenaventura Blvd 12,500 15,300 22.40%
Placer St W of Buenaventura Blvd 13,900 14,100 1.44%
Rancho Rd W of Airport Rd 6,200 9,100 46.77%
Victor Ave N of Rancho Rd 3,600 5,100 41.67%
Source: 2023-2045 Transportation Element (Appendix 3-1) Street Classification System
City streets are classified as arterials, collectors and local streets as defined below. In addition, Caltrans facilities within Redding include two additional classifications: freeways and expressways.
Arterial Streets. Arterials provide the principal network for citywide travel by all modes of travel, including walking, bicycling, motor vehicle and transit, and provide regional connections. Most commercial land uses in Redding are accessed directly via arterial streets. Arterial streets in Redding generally have one or two Packet Pg. 1442
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
5.16-16 FEBR UAR Y 2024
motor vehicle travel lanes per direction, and sidewalks on both sides. Bicycle facilities on arterial streets should consist of buffered bicycle lanes or separated bikeway facilities wherever feasible, recognizing that this will be difficult to achieve on currently developed roadways without substant ial modifications in lane configurations, striping, sidewalk modifications, right -of-way limitations, and/or other improvements.
Arterial streets are further subdivided into types of arterials, to reflect the land use and neighborhood context specific to each type. The ultimate, ideal design of these roadways include the following attributes:
▪ Principal Arterials in Redding will typically provide two to three automobile lanes per direction by 2045, with wide sidewalks and bulbouts at crossings to provide for low -stress pedestrian travel.
Protected bikeways should be provided where feasible on principal arterials. Measures to enhance transit service are also encouraged, including queue jump lanes and bus stop amenities. Right -of- ways necessary to accommodate pedestrian, bicycle, and transit services, projected traffic, and emergency access/evacuation needs will generally range from 84 feet to 135 feet. ▪ Minor Arterials generally will provide one to two automobile lane per direction by 2045, plus a center left-turn lane or median, and wide sidewalks on both sides, and bulbouts at crossings, to allow for low -stress pedestrian travel. Protected bikeways should be provided where feasible on minor arterials. Right-of-ways will generally range from 84 feet to 96 feet.
Sufficient rights-of way for the City’s identified principal and minor arterial streets and intersections should be obtained in advance of need where appropriate to accommodate the diverse need of these facilities beyond the needs of 2045. The proposed General Plan Transportation Element encourages certain streets to be constructed to address current needs for ingress/egress during emergencies such as wildfire and flooding events which include additional lanes than needed to accommodate projected 2045 traffic. Figure
5.16-1, Redding Circulation System, shows the planned buildout for the City’s transportation network. ▪ Collector Streets. Collectors provide connections for all modes of travel within and between residential areas and activity centers, as well as providing direct access to land uses. Collectors also provide connections between arterial and local streets. Collector streets in Redding have one motor vehicle travel lanes per direction, with sidewalks on both sides at buildout. Protected bikeways or buffered bicycle lanes should be provided wherever feasible on collector street segments. Right - of-ways will generally range from 60 feet to 96 feet.
▪ Local Streets. Local streets provide direct access to abutting properties by all modes of travel. City streets that are not designated as arterials or collectors are local streets. Bicycle facilities on local streets generally consist of shared travel lanes between moto rists and bicyclists. Local streets typically provide sidewalks on both sides, and allow on -street parking. Local streets should be designed to encourage low travel speeds and provide “low -stress” travel routes for bicyclists and pedestrians. Right-of-ways will generally range from 28 feet to 60 feet. ▪ Freeways. Travelers use freeways for longer trips by motor vehicle, including regional travel as well as crosstown trips within the Redding urban area. Freeways in Redding typically provide 2 to 3 lanes per direction, with grade-separated interchanges. Motor vehicle travel speeds on freeways typically range from 55 to 70 mph.
Packet Pg. 1443
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
PLACEWORKS 5.16-17
▪ Expressways. Travelers use expressways for regional trips and longer trips within Redding, primarily via motor vehicle, typically with 2 to 3 motor vehicle lanes per direction. Direct access to adjacent properties from an expressway is typically restricted or not allo wed. State Route (SR) 273 is classified as an expressway on segments north and south of downtown Redding. Protected bikeways or multi-use paths should be provided where feasible adjacent to expressway segments.
Right-of-ways will generally range from 110 feet to 150 feet.
Bicycle Facilities
The following information about the City’s existing bikeway facilities is derived from Appendix A of the Redding Active Transportation Plan.
Overview of Bikeway Classifications
Jurisdictions within California organize bicycle facilities into the following classifications; these serve as a common terminology across the state making it easier to understand the degree to which space on a street or within a general right-of-way is being uniquely designated for people bicycling. ▪ Class I Bikeway (Bike Path) - Provides a completely separated right -of-way for the exclusive use of people bicycling and walking. The number and frequency of cross streets carrying motorists is minimized to the extent possible.
▪ Class II Bikeway (Bike Lane) - Provides a striped lane for one-way bicycle travel on a street or highway. ▪ Class III Bikeway (Bike Route) - Provides for shared use with people walking or motor vehicle traffic. ▪ Class IV Bikeway (Separated Bikeway) - A bikeway for the exclusive use of people biking that includes separation between the bikeway and the through vehicular traffic. The separation may include, but is not limited to, grade separation, flexible posts, inflexible physical barriers (e.g., concrete median), on- street parking, or a combination of treatments.
Existing Bikeway Network
The existing bikeway network is comprised of a combination of Class I, Class II and Class III bicycling facilities; these are displayed citywide in Figure 5.16-2, Bicycle Network in Redding. The Sacramento River Trail is the most extensive Class I facility within the City of Redding providing connectivity east -west along the Sacramento River as well as a few connections north - south across it. It also provides a connection to recreational areas outside and west of the City of Redding. Additional shared use paths are also present in smaller, more isolated locations providing connections from neighborhoods to local retail centers or from one neighborhood to an adjacent neighborhood. For example, the shared use path that runs parallel to Buena Ventura Boulevard.
Class II bicycle facilities (bicycle lanes) have been implemented on portions of key corridors such as Bonnie View Road, Victor Avenue, Cypress Avenue, Pine Street, California Street, Canby Road, and Bechelli Lane.
Many of the remaining streets providing consistent east-west and north-south connectivity across the City Packet Pg. 1444
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
5.16-18 FEBR UAR Y 2024
are currently Class III bicycle facilities (bicycle route) meaning designated as a bicycle route but a space where people bicycling are sharing the travel lane with motorists.
Bicycle Support Facilities and Amenities
Bicycling support facilities and amenities include bicycle parking, bicycle shops, and repair stations (e.g., a place to put air in a low tire or fix a flat tire). In total there are 66 locations with bicycle racks, as inventoried in the Redding ATP . Many are concentrated in the Downtown area and/or near shopping or commercial centers. At the local farmers market on Saturdays each week, there is also a bicycle valet service that helps encourage people to ride their bikes to/from the market. There are a tota l of five bicycle shops across the City, which are: The Bike Shop, Sports LTD, Chain Gang, Bikes Etc., Village Cycle, and Cyclopedia. There is one confirmed fix-it repair station within the City.
Pedestrian Facilities
The following information about the City’s existing pedestrian facilities is derived from Appendix A of the Redding Active Transportation Plan.
Pedestrian facilities generally include, but are not necessarily limited to, sidewalks, trails, multiuse paths, curb ramps, crosswalks, crossing aids (e.g., pedestrian crosswalk indicators), traffic control devices aimed at facilitating pedestrian crossings (e.g., flashing beacons at crosswalks), grade separated crossings, and other strategies to encourage and improve conditions for walking.
Existing Pedestrian Network
The existing pedestrian network in the City of Redding is made up of shared use paths and sidewalks. The City has strong sidewalk coverage in the Downtown core area, adjacent to and within many of the retail centers, and within most of the residential neig hborhoods. Figure 5.16-3, Pedestrian Facilities in Redding, illustrates the existing sidewalk coverage and connectivity of the current shared use paths for the City.
There are a number of parks and trails throughout the City that serve as attractive destinations for people walking and can also serve as useful connections to other destinations. The Sacramento River Trail is one example where people may use the trail as a destination in of itself to recreate and they may also use it as a means for reaching another a destination. Other notable pedestrian destinations within the City, beyond the retail and commercial areas, include the Sundial Bridge, Enterprise Community P ark, and Turtle Bay Park. These and other potential common destinations for people walking, such as schools.
Transit Facilities
The following information about the City’s existing transit facilities is derived from Appendix A of the Redding Active Transportation Plan.
Packet Pg. 1445
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
PLACEWORKS 5.16-19
The Redding Area Bus Authority (RABA) provides a fixed route and demand responsive transit services to the City of Redding and the broader urbanized area of Shasta County. The RABA fixed route service consists of eleven local routes and four express and commuter routes. RABA has three transit centers: the Downtown Transit Center, the Masonic Transfer Center, and the Canby Transfer Center . These three transit centers have the highest volume of passenger activities with over 500 boardings and alightings per day allowing riders to transfer to another route or walk to nearby regional destinations. According to the most recent RABA 2014 Short Range Transit Plan (SRTP), ridership of fixed route service has steadily grown serving over 800,000 individual rides for the fiscal year 2012/2013. This represents a 23% increase in riders from the fiscal year 2009/2010 to the fiscal year 2012/2013.
Figure 5.16-4, Redding Area Bus Authority Routes, Stops, and Service Area, shows the existing transit service in the City of Redding and SOI. The maps highlight the RABA service routes, bus stop locations, and service area. All local routes operate for approximately 12 hours per day Monday through Friday, with more limited- service hours on Saturday. Bus service is not provided on Sundays. All of the RABA local routes within the City of Redding operate on one -hour headways. The system relies heavily on trans fers with most routes stopping at two transfer centers. The RABA 2014 SRTP notes that nearly two -thirds of riders surveyed use more than one bus to complete their one-way trip.
Packet Pg. 1446
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
5.16-20 FEBR UAR Y 2024
This page intentionally left blank.
Packet Pg. 1447
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding) Roads
Freeway/Expressway
Interstate
Principal Arterial
Minor Arterial
Major Collector
Minor Collector
Local
Alley
REDDING GENERAL PLAN UPDATED DRAFT EIR
CITY OF REDDING
Source: Generated using ArcMap, 2023; City of Redding GIS 2017, 2021, 2022, and 2023.
Figure 5.16-1
Redding Circulation System
PLACEWORKS
Redding SOI
Redding City Limit
5.16 TRANSPORTATION
0 Scale (Miles)
2 44
CALIFORNIA
273
CALIFORNIA
273
CALIFORNIA
299
CALIFORNIA
299
CALIFORNIA
5 5
299
CALIFORNIA
299
CALIFORNIA
273
CALIFORNIA
5 5
44 CALIFORNIA
Pine Grove AvePine Grove Ave
Shasta Dam BlvdShasta Dam Blvd
Lake BlvdLake Blvd
Bear Mountain RdBear Mountain Rd
Oasis RdOasis Rd
Keswick Dam RdKeswick Dam Rd
Quartz Hill RdQuartz Hill Rd
Placer StPlacer St
Buenaventura BlvdBuenaventura Blvd
Shasta Shasta Vista DrVista Dr
Victor AveVictor Ave
Hartnell AveHartnell Ave
Boyle RdBoyle Rd
Old Alturas RdOld Alturas Rd
Old Alturas RdOld Alturas Rd
Old Oregon TrlOld Oregon Trl
Old 44 RdOld 44 Rd
Alta Mesa DrAlta Mesa Dr
Airport RdAirport Rd
Chum Crk RdChum Crk Rd
Rancho RdRancho Rd
S Bonnyview RdS Bonnyview Rd
Meadow View DrMeadow View Dr
Dersch RdDersch Rd
Placer StPlacer St
Lower Springs RdLower Springs Rd
Branstetter LnBranstetter Ln
Texas Springs Texas Springs
RdRd
Clear Creek RdClear Creek Rd
Canyon RdCanyon Rd
Riverside AveRiverside Ave
Cypress AveCypress Ave
China Gulch DrChina Gulch Dr
Oak StOak St
Packet Pg. 1448
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding) Bicycle Class
1 2
3 REDDING GENERAL PLAN UPDATED DRAFT EIR
CITY OF REDDING
Source: Generated using ArcMap, 2023; City of Redding GIS 2017, 2020.
Figure 5.16-2
Bicycle Network in Redding
PLACEWORKS
Redding SOI
Redding City Limit0
Scale (Miles)
2 44
CALIFORNIA
273
CALIFORNIA
273
CALIFORNIA
299
CALIFORNIA
299
CALIFORNIA
5 5
299
CALIFORNIA
299
CALIFORNIA
273
CALIFORNIA
5 5
44 CALIFORNIA
5.16 TRANSPORTATION
Pine Grove AvePine Grove Ave
Shasta Dam BlvdShasta Dam Blvd
Lake BlvdLake Blvd
Bear Mountain RdBear Mountain Rd
Oasis RdOasis Rd
Keswick Dam RdKeswick Dam Rd
Quartz Hill RdQuartz Hill Rd
Placer StPlacer St
Buenaventura BlvdBuenaventura Blvd
Shasta Shasta Vista DrVista Dr
Victor AveVictor Ave
Hartnell AveHartnell Ave
Boyle RdBoyle Rd
Old Alturas RdOld Alturas Rd
Old Alturas RdOld Alturas Rd
Old Oregon TrlOld Oregon Trl
Old 44 RdOld 44 Rd
Alta Mesa DrAlta Mesa Dr
Airport RdAirport Rd
Chum Crk RdChum Crk Rd
Rancho RdRancho Rd
Meadow View DrMeadow View Dr
Dersch RdDersch Rd
Placer StPlacer St
Lower Springs RdLower Springs Rd
Branstetter LnBranstetter Ln
Texas Springs Texas Springs
RdRd
Clear Creek RdClear Creek Rd
Can
yon Rd
Canyon Rd
Riverside AveRiverside Ave
Cypress AveCypress Ave
China Gulch DrChina Gulch Dr
Hawthorne AveHawthorne Ave
Oak StOak St
S Bonnyview RdS Bonnyview Rd
Packet Pg. 1449
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding) Sidewalks
REDDING GENERAL PLAN UPDATED DRAFT EIR
CITY OF REDDING
Source: Generated using ArcMap, 2023; City of Redding GIS 2017, 2021, and 2022.
Figure 5.16-3
Pedestrian Facilities in Redding
PLACEWORKS
Redding SOI
Redding City Limit0
Scale (Miles)
2 44
CALIFORNIA
273
CALIFORNIA
273
CALIFORNIA
299
CALIFORNIA
299
CALIFORNIA
5 5
299
CALIFORNIA
299
CALIFORNIA
273
CALIFORNIA
5 5
44 CALIFORNIA
5.16 TRANSPORTATION
Pine Grove AvePine Grove Ave
Shasta Dam BlvdShasta Dam Blvd
Lake BlvdLake Blvd
Bear Mountain RdBear Mountain Rd
Oasis RdOasis Rd
Keswick Dam RdKeswick Dam Rd
Quartz Hill RdQuartz Hill Rd
Placer StPlacer St
Buenaventura BlvdBuenaventura Blvd
Shasta Shasta Vista DrVista Dr
Victor AveVictor Ave
Hartnell AveHartnell Ave
Boyle RdBoyle Rd
Old Alturas RdOld Alturas Rd
Old Alturas RdOld Alturas Rd
Old Oregon TrlOld Oregon Trl
Old 44 RdOld 44 Rd
Alta Mesa DrAlta Mesa Dr
Airport RdAirport Rd
Chum Crk RdChum Crk Rd
Rancho RdRancho Rd
Meadow View DrMeadow View Dr
Dersch RdDersch Rd
Placer StPlacer St
Lower Springs RdLower Springs Rd
Branstetter LnBranstetter Ln
Texas Springs Texas Springs
RdRd
Clear Creek RdClear Creek Rd
Can
yon Rd
Canyon Rd
Riverside AveRiverside Ave
Cypress AveCypress Ave
China Gulch DrChina Gulch Dr
Hawthorne AveHawthorne Ave
Oak StOak St
S Bonnyview RdS Bonnyview Rd
Packet Pg. 1450
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding) RABA Bus Stops
RABA Bus Routes
RABA Existing Service Area Boundary
REDDING GENERAL PLAN UPDATED DRAFT EIR
CITY OF REDDING
Source: Generated using ArcMap, 2023; City of Redding GIS 2017, 2021, and 2022.
Figure 5.16-4
Redding Area Bus Authority Routes, Stops, and Service Area
PLACEWORKS
Redding SOI
Redding City Limit0
Scale (Miles)
2 44
CALIFORNIA
273
CALIFORNIA
273
CALIFORNIA
299
CALIFORNIA
299
CALIFORNIA
5 5
299
CALIFORNIA
299
CALIFORNIA
273
CALIFORNIA
5 5
44 CALIFORNIA
5.16 TRANSPORTATION
Pine Grove AvePine Grove Ave
Shasta Dam BlvdShasta Dam Blvd
Lake BlvdLake Blvd
Bear Mountain RdBear Mountain Rd
Oasis RdOasis Rd
Keswick Dam RdKeswick Dam Rd
Quartz Hill RdQuartz Hill Rd
Placer StPlacer St
Buenaventura BlvdBuenaventura Blvd
Shasta Shasta Vista DrVista Dr
Victor AveVictor Ave
Hartnell AveHartnell Ave
Boyle RdBoyle Rd
Old Alturas RdOld Alturas Rd
Old Alturas RdOld Alturas Rd
Old Oregon TrlOld Oregon Trl
Old 44 RdOld 44 Rd
Alta Mesa DrAlta Mesa Dr
Airport RdAirport Rd
Chum Crk RdChum Crk Rd
Rancho RdRancho Rd
S S
Bonnyview Bonnyview RdRd
Meadow View DrMeadow View Dr
Dersch RdDersch Rd
Placer StPlacer St
Lower Springs RdLower Springs Rd
Branstetter LnBranstetter Ln
Texas Springs Texas Springs
RdRd
Clear Creek RdClear Creek Rd
Can
yon Rd
Canyon Rd
Riverside AveRiverside Ave
Cypress AveCypress Ave
China Gulch DrChina Gulch Dr
Hawthorne AveHawthorne Ave
Oak StOak St
Packet Pg. 1451
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
PLACEWORKS 5.16-25
5.16.2 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
According to Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, a project would normally have a significant effect on the environment if the project would:
T-1 Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities.
T-2 Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines § 15064.3, subdivision (b).
T-3 Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment).
T-4 Result in inadequate emergency access.
T-5 In combination with past, present, and reasonably foreseeable projects, result in cumulative impacts with respect to transportation.
5.16.3 PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN POLICIES
The following goals and policies of the 2023-2045 General Plan are relevant to transportation impacts.
Public Facilities and Services Element
▪ Policy PF1J: Strive to ensure Ensure that the considerable public investment made in existing and new utility and street infrastructure is reliable and meets the existing and projected service demands.
Public Safety Element
▪ Policy PS4G: Consider establishing Develop a program to construct and maintain fire -access roads in ravine areas considered to have a very high fire danger to enhance the ability to suppress wildland fires.
These roads need not be surfaced and may also function as part of the City’s trail system. Erosion and impacts to native vegetation and natural features should be minimized. ▪ Policy PS4K: Enforce subdivision regulations that generally limit cul -de-sac lengths to no greater than 600 feet and strive to ensure that sufficient emergency-vehicle turnaround areas are provided. ▪ Policy PS4L: Apply as appropriate, subdivision regulations requiring each residential development having 50 or more dwelling units and each commercial development employing 150 or more people to have at least two connected points of public access as may be determined necessary by the Fire Marshal.
▪ Policy PS4M: Seek to construct Construct emergency-vehicle access routes to open -space areas at optimal locations within projects during the development process, as funding or law allows. As funding and physical conditions allow, construct such access routes in existing developments where warranted.
Packet Pg. 1452
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
5.16-26 FEBRU ARY 2024
▪ Policy PS4N: Strive to ensure Ensure new subdivisions have adequate fire protection measures such as multi-access for firefighting apparatus, noncombustible building construction, appropriate defensible space, street widths and grade to accommodate emergency vehicles and evacuees simultaneously. ▪ Policy PS11C: Consider implementing an emergency evacuation plan and consistently educate residents on:
o Access: Evacuation routes laid out for residents to use in case of emergency. o Signage: Signage, wayfinding, and designated evacuation routes. o Communication: Timely notices that may arrive through multiple communication avenues. o Assistance: Available assistance programs to aid resident evacuation during emergency.
Transportation Element
▪ Policy T1A : Strive to ensure that where complete streets infrastructure is constructed, it improves transportation choices for pedestrians, bicyclists, motorists, and public transportation riders and that users of all ages and abilities are considered in the planning, design, approval, construc tion, and operation of new streets, and the alteration and maintenance phases of existing streets by:
o Including infrastructure that promotes a safe means of travel for all users along the right of way, such as sidewalks, shared -use paths, bicycle lanes (including protected bicycle lanes or buffered bicycle lanes where feasible) or paved shoulders.
o Providing pedestrian and bike connections from developments to adjacent main streets, open space areas, parks, transit stops, schools, commercial and employment centers, and other activity centers as opportunities arise.
o Designing new development to incorporate street connectivity for all users. o Including new or alteration of existing infrastructure that facilitates safe crossing of the right-of-way for all users, such as: accessible curb ramps, high -visibility crosswalks, pedestrian refuge islands, smaller curb radii, corner bulb -outs, pedestrian signals, and bicycle detection at traffic signals where warranted.
o Incorporating features that improve the comfort, convenience, and safety of users such as pedestrian-oriented/wayfinding signs, pedestrian -scale lighting, benches and other street furniture, bicycle parking facilities, comfortable and attractive public tra nsportation stops and facilities, street trees, landscape, and planting strips. ▪ Policy T1B: Seek funding to establish a systematic complete street retrofit program that will effectively alter existing appropriately identified streets into complete streets. ▪ Policy T1C : Update the Redding Active Transportation Plan every four to seven years to ensure successful implementation of the City’s planned bicycle and pedestrian networks by undertaking the following:
Packet Pg. 1453
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
PLACEWORKS 5.16-27
o Work to identify and prioritize physical improvements that would make bicycle and pedestrian travel safer along current key bicycling and walking routes. o Pursue an implementation strategy to construct needed improvements. o Undertake improvements as part of street projects where reasonable and feasible.
Policy T1D: Consider requiring that development projects dedicate street rights-of-way and construct both on- and off-site improvements as appropriate to provide access and street connectivity for users of all ages and abilities, mitigate the effects of vehicle miles traveled (VMT) attributable to the project, and not degrade peak-hour LOS below the following adopted thresholds nor conflict with multi -modal performance standards. The City Council may, at its sole discretion, determine that the degradation of LOS is appropriate given the extraordinary circumstances of the project being proposed. The traffic analysis used to establish mitigation or improvement measures shall be based on the regional travel demand model or other City - approved methods. At the option of the City and as may be provided by City ordinance, improvements may be deferred by the City upon approval of a Deferred Improvement Plan which identifies improvements needed, costs, funding sources, and other pertinent data required by the City. ▪ Policy T1E: Strive to complete the planned build-out street network as illustrated on the Circulation Plan map, and ensure that the accompanying design standards, programs, and procedures include complete streets implementation as a main focus by undertaking the following measures. o Review as necessary the City’s design guidelines and standard cross -sections for streets, intersections (including roundabouts and traffic circles), pedestrian facilities, bicycle facilities, and transit facilities and revise as necessary to be consistent with National Association of City Transportation Officials (NACTO) and its guidelines regarding complete streets. o Consider establishing performance measures to evaluate multimodal travel conditions for pedestrians and bicyclists, such as Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) criteria, to guide development of the street network.
o Collaborate with the Redding Area Bus Authority (RABA) and other service providers to incorporate infrastructure to assist users in employing multiple modes of transportation in a single trip in order to increase transportation access and flexibility. Examples include but are not limited to, provisions for bicycle and wheelchair access on public transportation, secure bicycle racks at transit stops, and public transportation access to trails and recreational locations. o Consider the development of a Complete Streets Design Manual that can serve as a guide for public and private development projects that propose new streets or modifications of existing streets. ▪ Policy T1F: Strive to complete the Planned Pedestrian Improvements identified in the Redding Active Transportation Plan, and support the provision of an attractive, safe, and continuous system of sidewalks and other pedestrian facilities by undertaking the following measures where appropriate:
o Seek funding for the design and/or, construction, of the sidewalk, path, and crossing improvements identified in the Active Transportation Plan. Focus on securing funds to match federal and State grant program opportunities.
Packet Pg. 1454
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
5.16-28 FEBRU ARY 2024
o Where feasible and appropriate, seek to provide pedestrian -oriented features, such as benches, enhanced landscape, and trash receptacles, in commercial areas, including the Downtown and Redding Riverfront Specific Plan areas.
o Require new developments provide sidewalks or other pedestrian-dedicated facilities on both sides of new public streets contained within the development. Exceptions may be appropriate where the topography is difficult, proposed lots are of a rural or semi-rural nature, or where the development plan illustrates that pedestrians will be accommodated by alternative means. o Work with local organizations and neighborhood groups to develop a plan to determine where curbs, gutters, and sidewalks are needed on unimproved local streets and how to pay for the improvements; establishing sidewalk continuity wherever feasible is a priority. o Pursue funding for the continued replacement and repair of sidewalks that have deteriorated due to age and tree-root invasion.
o Work to develop and seek funding to implement a program to identify, prioritize, and construct the retrofitting of existing intersections that do not currently have accessibility ramps and accommodations at the street corners.
o Strive to ensure that all new or renovated pedestrian facilities be of a sufficient width to ensure pedestrian comfort and safety and to accommodate the special needs of persons with physical disabilities wherever feasible.
▪ Policy T1G : Strive to complete the Build -Out Bikeway Network identified in the Redding Active Transportation Plan, and support related measures to make bicycling a safe, accessible, comfortable, and sustainable transportation mode by:
o Working to secure funding to construct the bikeway network improvements identified in the Active Transportation Plan.
o Pursuing the installation of protected bicycle lanes (Class IV separated bikeway treatments) where feasible on arterial streets.
o Seeking to incorporate appropriate bicycle facilities in the design of interchanges, intersections, and other street-improvement/maintenance projects.
o As funding allows, making improvements to streets, signs, and traffic signals as needed to improve bicycle travel, and keep bikeways free of overhanging shrubbery, debris, and other obstacles. o Supporting to the extent possible the efforts of public transit providers including the Redding Area Bus Authority (RABA) to provide bicycle racks on all buses within the system. o As appropriate, supporting the requirement that new development provides bicycle facilities or pay in-lieu fees based on the fair share of that development’s impacts on the bikeway system and needs identified on the Comprehensive Bikeway Plan.
Packet Pg. 1455
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
PLACEWORKS 5.16-29
▪ Policy T1H: Strive to achieve the level of service described in this Element for motor vehicle traffic on roadway segments and at intersections during weekday peak -hours, except where achieving the LOS standard would conflict with complete streets goals and standards or the City Council determines that extraordinary circumstances exist to require deviation from the LOS standard by requiring new development to provide improvements, pay in -lieu fees and/or pay development impact fees as approved by the City Council and based on the fair share of that development’s contribution of improvements needed to achieve the following peak-hour LOS standard/thresholds:
Level of Service "C" on all City roadways and intersections, except at those specific locations/roadway segments identified within this Element, where a LOS "D" is appropriate including the Downtown Specific Plan area, streets within the state highway syst em and interchanges and river -crossing street corridors whose capacity is affected by adjacent intersections.
▪ Policy T2A: Support the provision of a connected network of low -stress walk and bikeways to connect major activity centers, including the provision of appropriate low -stress walk and bikeway access to Downtown Redding and the Redding Transit Center by considering impl ementation of the measures identified below. Low -stress bikeways should generally consist of separated bikeways (Class IV bikeways), sometimes referred to as “protected bicycle lanes”, on arterial or collector streets; bicycle boulevard treatments on local streets; or multi-use paths. o Work to identify and prioritize routes for a connected network oflow -stress walk and bikeways, identifying barriers to low-stress travel with plans to address them. and Incorporate maps and plans into future updates of the Redding Active Transportation Pla n. Pursue funding to construct the network.
o Work to identify networks for walking and biking to connect with key travel nodes, and activity centers, including transit nodes and strategic growth areas. Consider accessibility to all neighborhoods and housing, striving to ensure access to a connected n etwork of low-stress walk and bikeways within one -half-mile radius to all residents. Key travel nodes and activity nodes include Downtown Redding, Redding Transit Center, transit nodes (where multiple transit lines intersect), schools, City Hall, County Government Center, Shasta College, Simpson University, major parks and recreation centers, employment centers/business parks, neighborhood commercial nodes and regional commercial centers.
o As funding permits, develop design standards for the low -stress walk and bikeway network that establishes a "kit of parts" set of standards for the three low-stress facility types: 1) separated bike lanes on arterial and collector streets, 2) neighborhood greenways, and 3) off -street paths and trails. An implementation strategy to construct needed improvements to the network should be established.
o Work with the Cities of Anderson and Shasta Lake, and Shasta County to identify low -stress walk, bike routes that connect to the downtown core strategic -growth areas of the cities and towns of Shasta County.
Packet Pg. 1456
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
5.16-30 FEBRU ARY 2024
o Support to the extent feasible and as funding allows operation of amenities and programming to enable daily transportation by people biking and walking, including bikeshare services, the Shasta Bike Depot at the Redding Transit Center, secure bike parking, short-term bike parking racks, and similar secure bike parking and e -bike charging stations to meet existing and future needs for the encouragement and education of those who travel via walking or biking. o Work with the local school districts to develop specific transportation plans associated with schools and the surrounding neighborhoods to address conflicts with; traffic, pedestrian movements, safety during school hours, and bicycle facilities to and from schools. This may include a plan to implement slower speed school zones while children are present and flashing beacons to identify when these school zones are in effect.
▪ Policy T2B: Support provision of continuous greenbelt trails within and between parks, and along the Sacramento River connecting Redding to the City of Shasta Lake, the City of Anderson, and Cottonwood.
Efforts may include:
o Striving to provide trail access to all residents within a one -half mile radius to all residents and connect trails to all parks which should be equipped with safe and secure bike parking and electric charging stations for bikes and vehicles.
o Striving to connect trails to all schools, parks, and other large recreation destinations such as the Sacramento River Parkway, Downtown, the Civic Auditorium, Waterworks Park, and the YMCA, as well as civic buildings such as the Courthouse, Library, Shasta County government building on Court Street, and City Hall.
▪ Policy T3A: Support the provision of enhanced transit service that is timely, cost -effective, responsive to growth patterns, and meet the diverse needs of existing and future transit demand. by:
o Working with the Shasta Regional Transportation Agency (SRTA) and public transit providers including the Redding Area Bus Authority (RABA) on an ongoing basis to plan and implement additional public transit services.
o Supporting to the extent feasible and as funding allows the continuation and expansion of private commercial or nonprofit bus operations to provide additional regional transit opportunities for residents.
o Promoting coordination of public transit , on-demand service, autonomous vehicles, intercity rail, bicycle share program, intercity bus, and air transportation services to enhance the transportation options available for residents and visitors to the Redding community. o Supporting to the extent feasible and as funding allows provision of intercity bus service. o Developing policies and procedures to implement shared mobility devices to help enhance public transit options. These micro-transit shared mobility type devices could include scooters and e-bikes, and autonomous vehicles, and but may be expanded as technology develops.
Packet Pg. 1457
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
PLACEWORKS 5.16-31
▪ Policy T3B : Provide physical measures to enhance transit service by considering to undertake the following:
o Require new development to install and maintain passenger amenities at designated bus stops when relevant to accommodating project trips or mitigating VMT as appropriate. o Provide bus facilities along arterial streets as indicated in an applicable transit development plan.
Determine the precise locations during the development plan review or at the time of major street improvement or reconstruction.
o Work with RABA to provide safe, attractive, well -lit, comfortable, and protected waiting areas for bus passengers.
▪ Policy T4A : Support measures that help reduce VMT below regional averages on a “residential per capita” and “per employee” basis by:
o Monitoring traffic trends through advanced technological solutions to determine mobility options, infrastructure improvements, and development decisions. o Encouraging employers, colleges, and schools to provide incentives and facilities (e.g., showers) for employees and students utilizing alternatives to the single-occupant automobile, such as carpools, vanpools, buses, bicycling, and walking.
o Encouraging employers, including government agencies, to allow telecommuting and flex time and to promote staggered shifts or base work hours that do not coincide with peak-period traffic to reduce peak-hour trips.
▪ Policy T5A: Support efforts to eliminate traffic fatalities and serious injuries attributable to collisions on City streets by considering the following measures:
o Develop a “Vision Zero” strategy to reduce traffic fatalities and serious injuries to zero. The aim of “Vision Zero” is to eliminate all traffic fatalities and severe injuries, while increasing safe, healthy, and equitable mobility for all.
o Implement safety improvements consistent with those recommended by the Redding Local Roadway Safety Plan (LRSP) as funding allows.
o Monitor collision data and develop countermeasures to address identified collision patterns as feasible.
o Identify and prioritize intersections and other locations where collisions have occurred or that present safety challenges for pedestrians, bicyclists, or other users, including, but not limited to, intersections within one mile of schools; consider gathering additional data through methods such as walkability/bikeability audits.
o Restrict speed limits where feasible within the confines of State law, particularly in residential neighborhoods, Downtown, and other areas of the City where pedestrian and bicycle travel are strongly encouraged to reduce the potential for pedestrian injuries and fatalities.
Packet Pg. 1458
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
5.16-32 FEBRU ARY 2024
o As funding is identified, implement measures to reduce motor vehicle speeds where applicable.
Such measures may include but are not limited to; installation of traffic circles and/or narrower lane widths (10 to 11 feet).
o Consider installing automated speed enforcement of motorized vehicles on high-risk road segments and at high -risk intersections/traffic circles and installing automated traffic cameras on high -risk road segments and at high-risk intersections/traffic circles. ▪ Policy T5B : Promote safety in neighborhoods by developing the local transportation network in a manner that does not create conflicts between vehicles and residents Efforts may include:
o Develop and implement as feasible, neighborhood protection plans when traffic studies or monitoring confirm excessive traffic volumes, substantial through traffic, speeding, or vehicle collisions in specific residential areas.
o Emphasize the use of landscape and other visual cues to slow through traffic; the installation of physical measures such as: delineators, traffic circles, and speed tables should be designed to enhance the visual aspects of the subdivision.
o Establish street design standards and review criteria that will result in neighborhood streets that discourage cut through traffic and keep travel speeds low. The design standards may consider such things as excessive length and width and lack of connecting streets to adjacent neighborhoods and arterial streets. Encourage new subdivisions to utilize a grid street layout where feasible and to have multiple points of access to enhance access and reduce funneling traffic into one intersection. o Strongly encourage new neighborhoods to incorporate detached sidewalks and to establish landscape "parkways" between the curb and sidewalk. Continuous and consistent tree planting to form canopy closure is encouraged.
o Route through traffic around the perimeters of neighborhoods where possible. ▪ Policy T6A: Strive to retain alleys and streets in the Downtown area to create shared spaces for bicycling and walking, and convenient service access, to local businesses. ▪ Policy T6B: Work to identify and seek funding for motorized and low -stress non -motorized transportation linkages to connect Downtown Redding. Destinations outside of Downtown that would require additional connections include Park Marina, Turtle Bay, and Redding Civic Auditorium areas. ▪ Policy T6C: Any new uses Downtown that would typically require a Traffic Study may be exempted unless it is determined that the proposed development would substantially increase traffic at intersections and roadways within this area of the City. If a traffic study i s determined to be required the study should identify measures to maintain high-quality access and mobility in the area with a priority toward active transportation modes. New discretionary land use permit requests within the Downtown area, which generate net new PM peak-hour vehicle trips, should participate in enhancing access and mobility for transit, bicycle, and pedestrian modes. These enhancements may include, but are not limited to:
Packet Pg. 1459
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
PLACEWORKS 5.16-33
o Enhancing sidewalks to create a high -quality pedestrian environment, including wider sidewalks and improved crosswalks, native and drought-resistant landscaping, buffers between sidewalks and vehicle travel lanes, enhanced pedestrian lighting, wayfinding s ignage, shade trees, and canopies, increased availability of benches, provisions for café -style seating, and usage of monument elements and other forms of public art.
o Improving bicycle facilities to include attractive and secure bicycle parking, installation of bike lockers in appropriate locations, and provision of bicycle lanes, bike paths, and wayfinding signage along appropriate roadways.
o Supporting the development of a Downtown Business Improvement District or similar mechanism to help fund ongoing maintenance of the streetscape enhancements. ▪ Policy T7A: Strive to maintain adequate on-street and public off- street parking areas, including electric vehicle charging stations, to meet ongoing parking demands by considering the following measures:
o Pursue funding options and strategies for the construction and maintenance of shared parking facilities/structures Downtown.
o Seek funding to provide electric charging stations at parking lots and rest areas for cars, trucks, and bicycles throughout the City.
o Encourage and facilitate the provision of electric-vehicle charging facilities in new parking lots and multi-family residential developments.
o Strive to install secure bicycle parking with electric charging stations and large enough for cargo bikes in the Downtown area and at City parks, civic buildings, and other community centers. ▪ Policy T7B : Endeavor Periodically review to ensure that required parking provisions for private development and modify as necessary to supports efforts to encourage multimodal travel and reduce VMT by:
o Pursuing Evaluating the use of maximum and minimum standards for automobile parking spaces in transit corridors and Downtown to promote use of alternate modes of travel as may be appropriate. o Pursuing minimum standards for bicycle parking, including both long -term and short-term bicycle parking spaces.
▪ Policy T7C: Generally, prohibit on-street automobile parking on arterial streets if there is not adequate space for bike lanes and parking lanes outside the Downtown area to reduce congestion and conflicts. ▪ Policy T7D: Work to ensure the provision of adequate curbside or off-street space where applicable to accommodate passenger pick -up/drop-off activity by transportation network companies (TNC), and delivery services.
Packet Pg. 1460
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
5.16-34 FEBRU ARY 2024
▪ Policy T8A: Work closely with Caltrans and the Shasta Regional Transportation Agency (SRTA) to ensure that State facilities located within the City —including SR 299, SR 44, SR 273, Interstate 5, and intersections/interchanges that involve those facilities —are constructed in a manner consistent with the goals and policies of this element to the extent feasible. ▪ Policy T9A: Continue to plan and develop the Redding Municipal Airport as addressed in the Economic Development and Public Facilities and Services Elements to maximize its contributions to business efficiency, economic development, and recreational opportunities within the region. ▪ Policy T9B: Support Benton Airpark as a public -use, general aviation airport and commercial - reliever facility for the Redding Municipal Airport.
▪ Policy T10A : Encourage the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) Amtrak, the State of California, the San Joaquin Joint Powers Authority, and the Capital Corridor Joint Powers Authority to increase passenger service by expanding rail schedules to include a greater number of stops and range of connection times and by providing safe, comfortable and seamless station facilities that connect to the adjacent RABA Downtown Transit Center and the bike share program.
▪ Policy T10B: Work with UPRR, the State of California, and other stakeholders to identify any surplus right-of-way that may be suitable for parking or other facilities associated with a future light-rail system. ▪ Policy T10C : Seek the cooperation of UPRR in establishing a rail -side facility for freight -container unloading to augment goods-transportation opportunities. ▪ Policy 10D : Strive to protect Protect through zoning existing/planned rail alignments and facilities through zoning from encroachment by new potentially incompatible land uses to the extent feasible. ▪ Policy T10E : Support efforts as funding allows to improve safety at locations where rail and other transportation facilities interface.
▪ Policy T10F: Strive to provide for Seek funding as appropriate for the construction of additional grade- separated railroad crossings at South Bonnyview Road and in the Downtown area.
Community Design and Development Element
▪ Policy CDD 10D: Encourage development in the City to include inviting, attractive, accessible, and walkable urban mixed-use neighborhoods combining residential, commercial, recreational, open space, and employment to maximize the use of underused urban lots. ▪ Policy CDD10I: Provide safe and comprehensive transportation facilities with appropriate accessibility standards, consistent with approved transit plans and policies. Pursue incorporation of bicycle and pedestrian routes, public transit stops, and bus shelters into the design of new developments and redevelopment of older projects to help residents access services, commerce, employment, education, and recreation consistent with approved transit plans and policies.
Packet Pg. 1461
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
PLACEWORKS 5.16-35
▪ Policy CDD11A: Encourage developers to create new residential developments in infill priority areas that are available to a broad segment of the community The developments should be pedestrian and bicycle friendly, to make efficient use of infrastructure and land available with densities that will help facilitate the provision and use of public transit where it is available. ▪ Policy CDD17A: Allow a variety of residential street widths and designs to be incorporated into new residential developments based on the function of the various streets. Pavement width should generally be limited to the minimum necessary to adequately meet circulation demands and emergency vehicle access.
▪ Policy CDD17B: Encourage new neighborhoods to incorporate detached sidewalks and to establish landscaped “parkways” between curb and sidewalk. Continuous and consistent tree planting to form canopy closure is encouraged.
▪ Policy CDD17C: To minimize speed and cut-through traffic, consider the use of visual design techniques such as:
o Narrowing at intersections by creating bulb-outs and median refuges. o Diversion of traffic.
o Landscaping and neighborhood greenways.
o Utilizing pedestrian level streetlights.
o Modifying straight, long, and wide sections.
5.16.4 IMPACT DISCUSSION
TRANS-1 The proposed project would not conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities [Threshold T-1] Local programs, plans, ordinances, and policies that address the City’s transportation system are described in Section 5.16.1.1 , Regulatory Framework , and include the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) and Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) for the Shasta Region, the Redding A TP, the RABA Short Range Transit Plan, Title 11, Vehicles and Traffic of the Redding Municipal Code, and the Redding Complete Streets Policy.
The proposed Transportation Element focuses on developing a transportation system that meets the needs of all segments of the population through a complete streets approach. This includes increasing options for alternative transportation (public transit, walking, and bicycling); ensuring that pedestrian and bicycle systems connect residential neighborhoods to public facilities and services, schools, parks, and shopping areas; and other means to develop a multi -modal transportation system that meets the nee ds of all members of the community. As shown in Figures 10 through 12 of the proposed Transportation Element, Packet Pg. 1462
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
5.16-36 FEBRU ARY 2024
all planned bicycle and pedestrian improvements would be consistent with the Redding ATP. The proposed roadway improvements would also be consistent with the improvements identified in the 2018 RTP/SCS.
The City’s Community Design and Development Element also support s alternative transportation by promoting infill and mixed -use development, increasing residential densities along major traffic corridors and near employment opportunities and shopping, and encouraging circulation improvements that promote community connectivity. The goals and policies of the proposed Elements are therefore consistent with the regional goals and strategies expressed in the 2018 RTP/SCS. D iscretionary projects are reviewed on a case-by-case basis according to the Redding Traffic Guidelines to determine compliance with the City’s Vehicle Congestion Management Program. When necessary, mitigation measures that reduce the number of single -occupant motor vehicle trips are imposed to confirm compliance with the measures.
Implementation of the 2023-2045 General Plan would have a beneficial effect on the City’s transportation system by enhancing safety on the roadway system and promoting alternative travel modes, including transit, pedestrian, and bicycle circulation systems. There would be no impact.
Level of Significance Before Mitigation: Impact TRANS-1 would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.
TRANS-2: Implementation of the proposed project would not generate VMT levels inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b) regarding policies to reduce VMT. [Threshold T-2]
Impact TRA NS-2 evaluates whether the project would conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3(b), which describes specific considerations for analyzing transportation impacts as amended on July 1, 2020 pursuant to SB 375. CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3(b) states that vehicle miles traveled (VMT) is “generally” the most appropriate measure of transportation impacts.
No particular methodology or metric is mandated by Section 15064.3(b) and the methodology or metric is left to the lead agency, bearing in mind the criteria the legislature had in mind for determining the significance of transportation impacts in SB -743. These were expressed in Public Resource Code section 21099(b)(1), which states: “[t]hose criteria shall promote the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, the development of multimodal transportation networks, and a diversity of land uses.” The assessment of VMT impacts for this EIR under Impact TRA NS-2 was conducted by GHD utilizing the Shasta County activity -based travel demand model (ShastaSIM) that was developed and maintained by SRTA. ShastaSIM is an advanced activity-based tour model that simulates the travel behavior of all residents in Shasta County over the course of a typical 24-hour weekday. ShastaSIM represents these travel activities as a series of "trip -legs" or "tours" connect ing activities each person engages in, such as going to work, shopping or attending school. The current model version (ShastaSIM 1.2) was adopted on October 9, 2018.
Packet Pg. 1463
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
PLACEWORKS 5.16-37
The ShastaSIM model reports VMT and VMT per Resident (commonly referred to as “VMT per Capita”) as a measure of effectiveness and the calculations of VMT reflect a combined VMT for residential, work and school trips (although labeled “Household-Based VMT” in model documentation).
In order to evaluate potential VMT impacts with implementation of the 2023-2045 General Plan, the 2018 TDM was adjusted to reflect actual year 2020 conditions based on development that had occurred in the City since the 2018 TDM was prepared. Therefore, for purposes of the following VMT analysis, year 2020 is considered the baseline condition. Similarly, for assessing year 2045 conditions under the 2023 -2045 General Plan, the 2040 TDM was adjusted to reflect potential development in Redding and its SOI through the year 2045. The results are shown on Table 5.16-3, Redding 2020 and 2045 VMT Summary.
Significance Threshold
In December 2018, the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) released its final Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA. For residential and office projects, OPR recommends that a reduction of 15% or more in the regional rate of VMT should be the target for land use projects such as residential, office, and retail. The 15% figure originated in the Air Resources Board’s California’s 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan as the average statewide reduction in light -duty VMT that would be needed to meet the State’s greenhouse gas reduction goals. CARB has subsequently issued targets for individual MPO regions.
While some of the GHG reductions are based on land use proximity (e.g. placing jobs near housing and services in the land use diagram) much of the VMT reduction relies on the use of transit, and in particular high quality transit. Although transit in the City is improving, high-quality transit as defined by the state (15 minute headways during peak hour) is not yet available in the City meaning that for much of the City the personal vehicle is the only effective mode of transportation . The OPR guidance also notes tha t VMT is largely a regional impact and that participation in regional programs may be an appropriate method of reducing impacts.
Based on the OPR’s 15% reduction recommendation (which is conservative given the above referenced allowable 4% reduction established by Shasta RTA in the 2018 RTP/SCS ), Impact TRANS -2 would be considered potentially significant if the forecasted rate of VMT per Resident for the City of Redding and its Sphere of Influence (SOI) under Year 2045 conditions with implementation of the proposed Project were to exceed 85 percent of the baseline (year 2020) regional rate of VMT per Resident for Shasta County. Based on the baseline countywide rate of VMT per Resident (18.3) as shown in Table 5.16 -3, Impact TRANS -2 would be considered significant if the rate of VMT per Resident attributable to Redding and its SOI were to exceed 15.6 VMT per Resident.
Packet Pg. 1464
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
5.16-38 FEBRU ARY 2024
TABLE 5.16-3 REDDING 2020 AND 2045 VMT SUMMARY
Jurisdiction Population Employment
Total VMT VMT per
Resident
Threshold1
Above
Threshold
?
II Trips
VMT
IX and IX
Trips VMT Total VMT per
Resident
2020 Baseline
Redding 106,816 50,778 1,142,736 308,584 1,451,321 13.7 - - Countywide 191,905 73,585 2,838,772 678,140 3,516,912 18.3 - - General Plan 2045
Redding 124,544 59,712 1,366,124 449,599 1,815,723 14.7 15.6 No Redding and
SOI 137,377 65,360 1,546,876 559,273 2,106,149 15.6 15.6 No Countywide 225,478 86,976 3,374,575 877,300 4,251,875 18.9 - - Source: GHD 2022
1 VMT per Resident threshold is 85 percent of the 2020 Baseline Countywide average (18.3 miles x 0.85 = 15.6 miles) Findings
This analysis found that the forecasted rate of VMT per Resident under Year 2045 conditions with the proposed 2023 -2045 General Plan is 14.7 VMT per Resident within the City limits, and 15.6 VMT per Resident within the City and SOI, which would not exceed the threshold. This finding is consistent with the 2018 RTP/SCS which noted that Redding has the lowest rate of VMT per capita in Shasta County, and the shortest average trip lengths in the County, reflecting the proximity of homes, jobs and services with in Redding. This impact is less than significant.
Level of Significance Before Mitigation: TRANS-2 would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.
TRANS-3: The project would not substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g. sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment). [Threshold T-3] Roadway hazards are typically assessed at the project level. Potential hazards associated with future development projects would be analyzed and evaluated in detail through the project-specific environmental review process or during project application rev iew. Prior to the construction of streets, highways, alleys, traffic signals, and related public improvements the City of Redding Public Works Department reviews and needs to approve plans according to construction standards and specifications. Additionally, the Redding Local Road Safety Plan will continue to help to guide improvements to the local roadway system based on existing gaps needs.
Packet Pg. 1465
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
PLACEWORKS 5.16-39
While growth within the Planning Area would result in changes to the existing transportation network, the proposed 2023-2045 Transportation Element contains policies that require local planning and development decisions to consider impacts to transportation facilities. The following General Plan policies would support the design of a transportation system that is safe for all modes of travel. The following policies could directly and indirectly result in improving the transportation network:
▪ Policy T1I: Work with the public, stakeholders, and other jurisdictions and agencies to promote, design, and construct an effective transportation system that serves users of all ages and abilities. ▪ Policy T1G: Pursue financing for components of the transportation system, and strive to ensure that the transportation capital improvement program and other budgetary tools include funding for Complete Streets infrastructure by:
o Update the transportation capital improvement program (CIP) as necessary and pursue grant funds and other funding sources to augment City resources.
o Striving to provide appropriate improvements to improve multimodal accessibility with routine street maintenance and improvements such as pavement overlays, sidewalk repair, and ADA curb ramp installation.
▪ Policy T5A: Support efforts to eliminate traffic fatalities and serious injuries attributable to collisions on City streets.
▪ Policy T10 E: Support efforts as funding to improve safety at locations where rail and other transportation facilities interface.
Implementation of these policies would promote the design of improvements to the transportation network that are safe for all modes of travel. Compliance with State regulations on roadway and facility design, materials, and signage would further minimize this impact. Implementation of proposed project would not result in conflicts with adopted policies, plans, or actions or otherwise increase hazards due to a design feature that may have a significant impact on the environment and impacts would be less than significant.
Level of Significance Before Mitigation: Impact TRANS-3 would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.
TRANS-4: The project would not result in inadequate emergency access. [Threshold T-4]
Future potential development which could occur during the buildout of the proposed 2023-2045 General Plan would alter land use patterns and increase travel demand on the transportation network that may influence emergency access. Like roadway hazards, emergency access is typically assessed at the project level, and potential impacts to emergency access associated with future development projects would be Packet Pg. 1466
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
5.16-40 FEBRU ARY 2024
analyzed and evaluated in detail through the environmental review process or during project application review. Prior to the construction of streets, highways, alleys, traffic signals, and related public improvements, the City of Redding Public Works Department reviews and needs to approve plans according to construction standards and specifications to ensure adequate emergency access . This may include applying for an encroachment permit and other requirements outlined in the Temp Traffic Control Plan Guidelines for projects that involve working in the City of Redding right of way.
While growth within the Planning Area would result in changes to land use and the existing transportation network, the proposed 2023-2045 Public Safety Element contains policies that require local planning and development decisions to consider improvements to transportation efficiency, mobility, and access including developing and updating emergency response plans. The following describes the policies that directly and indirectly result in providing emergency access:
▪ Policy PS4G: Consider establishing Develop a program to construct and maintain fire -access roads in ravine areas considered to have a very high fire danger to enhance the ability to suppress wildland fires.
These roads need not be surfaced and may also function as part of the City’s trail system. Erosion and impacts to native vegetation and natural features shall be minimized. ▪ Policy PS4K: Enforce subdivision regulations that generally limit cul -de-sac lengths to no greater than 600 feet and strive to ensure that sufficient emergency-vehicle turnaround areas are provided. ▪ Policy PS4L: Apply as appropriate, subdivision regulations requiring each residential development having 50 or more dwelling units and each commercial development employing 150 or more people to have at least two connected points of public access as may be determined n ecessary by the Fire Marshal.
▪ Policy PS4M: Seek to construct Construct emergency-vehicle access routes to open -space areas at optimal locations within projects during the development process, as funding or law allows. As funding and physical conditions allow, construct such access routes in existing developments where warranted. ▪ Policy PS4N: Strive to ensure Ensure new subdivisions have adequate fire protection measures such as multi-access for firefighting apparatus, noncombustible building construction, appropriate defensible space, street widths and grade to accommodate emergency vehicles and evacuees simultaneously.
Implementation of these policies would address emergency access by considering access routes, developing and updating emergency response plans, and incorporating emergency access considerations in the design of future street improvements. Implementation of the 2023 -2045 General Plan would not result in inadequate emergency access that may have a significant impact on the environment and impacts would be less than significant. No mitigation measures are required.
Level of Significance Before Mitigation: Impact TRANS-4 would be less than significant.
Packet Pg. 1467
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
PLACEWORKS 5.16-41
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.
5.16.5 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
TRANS-5 Implementation of the proposed project would not, in combination with past, present, and reasonably foreseeable projects, result in a cumulative impact with respect to transportation.
Future potential development under the proposed 2023-2045 General Plan would contribute to an increase in VMT in the City and SOI as shown in Table 5.16-3. Buildout of the proposed 2023-2045 General Plan is assumed over a 25-year project horizon. Implementation of the proposed 2023-2045 General Plan by the horizon year of 2045 would result in a net increase of people and employees in the Planning Area.
As described under impact discussion TRANS-2, implementation of the proposed project would result in a rate of VMT per Resident for the City and SOI that would be approximately 15 percent lower than the existing Countywide rate of VMT per Resident.
Similarly, the 2018 RTP/SCS noted that Redding has the lowest rate of VMT per capita in Shasta County, and the shortest average trip lengths in the County, reflecting the proximity of homes, jobs and services within Redding.
As a result, future development within the City and SOI under the proposed 2023-45 by the horizon year of 2045 is not anticipated to contribute to increases in the regional average rate of VMT per Resident, and therefore the project contribution to regional VMT impacts would be less than significant.
Level of Significance Before Mitigation: Impact TRANS-5 would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.
Packet Pg. 1468
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
5.16-42 FEBRU ARY 2024
5.16.6 REFERENCES
California Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR). 2018, December. Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA. https://opr .ca.gov/docs/20190122- 743_Technical_Advisory.pdf.
Redding, City of. 2009, January. Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines. https://www.cityofredding.org/home/showdocument?id=936
_____.2012, August. City of Redding Complete Streets Policy. https://www.srta.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/3240/Redding_CompleteStreetsPolicy _____. 2017, December 5. Redding City Council Resolution No. 2017-113. _____. 2018a, April. Redding River Crossing Specific Plan. https://files.ceqanet.opr .ca.gov/39013- 4/attachment/SXlW13qFjDLBsUZk-prH3eG7mHvKXm7178REifvTmJvDEKdKep1UfaIH- 9ba2WPUnMowbsBW7usKYOe20.
_____. 2018b, April. City of Redding Active Transportation Plan. https://www.cityofredding.org/home/showpublisheddocument/25179/637522648511130000 _____. 2018c, April. City of Redding Active Transportation Plan, Appendices. https://www.cityofredding.org/home/showpublisheddocument/24020/637285241993370000 _____. 2022a, July. Citywide Transportation Impact Fee. https://www.cityofredding.org/home/showpublisheddocument/24116/637965037523570000 _____. 2022b, July. City of Redding Impact Fees.
https://www.cityofredding.org/home/showpublisheddocument/28035/637965037777330000 _____. 2022c, February 15. Redding Local Road Safety Plan. http://reddingcityca.iqm2.com/Citizens/FileOpen.aspx?Type=1&ID=3263&Inline=True _____. 2023, February. City of Redding Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 2022-2027. https://www.cityofredding.org/home/showpublisheddocument/28877/638131951485400000 Shasta Regional Transportation Agency (SRTA). 2018, October 9. Regional Transportation Plan & Sustainable Communities Strategy for the Shasta Region. https://www.srta.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/4285/2018-Regional-Transportation-Plan-- Sustainable-Communities-Strategy-adopted-Oct-9-2018?bidId= _____. 2021. Ways and Means Report. https://www.srta.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/5691/Ways-and- Means-Report-Winter-2021-105MB-pdf
Packet Pg. 1469
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
PLACEWORKS 5.17-1
5.17 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
This section of the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) discusses the current conditions for utility providers, including water, wastewater, stormwater, and solid waste. Electricity and natural gas are discussed in Section 5.6, Energy.
The analysis in this section was informed by correspondence with the Redding Water Utility Department, Redding Wastewater Utility Department, and Redding Solid Waste Department:
▪ Service Provider Questionnaires, May 24, 2023. A complete copy of the departments’ responses is included as Appendix 5.15-1 to this EIR.
5.17.1 WASTEWATER TREATMENT AND COLLECTION
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Regulatory Framework
Federal Regulations
The federal government regulates wastewater treatment and planning through the Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, more commonly known as the Clean Water Act (CWA), as well as through the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) per mit program, both of which are discussed in further detail below.
Clean Water Act
The CWA regulates the discharge of pollutants into watersheds throughout the nation. It is the primary federal law governing water pollution. Under the CWA, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) implements pollution control programs and sets wastewater standards. The objective of the CWA is to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the nation's waters by preventing point and nonpoint pollution sources, providing assistance to publicly owned treatment works for t he improvement of wastewater treatment, and maintaining the integrity of wetlands.
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
The NPDES permit program was established in the CWA to regulate municipal and industrial discharges to surface waters of the United States. Federal NPDES permit regulations have been established for broad categories of discharges, including point -source mu nicipal waste discharges and nonpoint -source stormwater runoff. NPDES permits generally identify effluent and receiving water limits on allowable concentrations and/or mass emissions of pollutants contained in the discharge; prohibitions on discharges not specifically allowed under the permit; and provisions that describe required actions by the discharger, Packet Pg. 1470
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
5.17-2 FEBRUARY 2024
including industrial pretreatment, pollution prevention, self -monitoring, and other activities. Wastewater discharge is regulated under the NPDES permit program for direct discharges into receiving waters and by the National Pretreatment Program for indirect discharges to a sewage treatment plant.
State Regulations
State Water Resources Control Board: Statewide General Waste Discharge Requirements The General Waste Discharge Requirements specify that all federal and state agencies, municipalities, counties, districts, and other public entities that own or operate sanitary sewer systems greater than one mile in length that collect and/or convey untre ated or partially treated wastewater to a publicly owned treatment facility in the State of California need to develop a Sewer Master Plan. The plan evaluates existing sewer collection systems and provides a framework for undertaking the construction of ne w and replacement facilities to maintain proper levels of service. The master plan includes inflow and infiltration studies to analyze flow monitoring and water use data, a capacity assurance plan to analyze the existing system with existing land use and unit flow factors, a condition assessment and sewer system rehabilitation plan, and a financial plan with recommended capital improvements and financial models.
Senate Bill 244- Planning for Disadvantaged Communities Government Code (GC) Section 56430, as amended by Senate Bill ( SB) 244, now requires L ocal Agency Formation Commissions to include in the Municipal Services Review a description of the “location and characteristics of any disadvantaged unincorporated communities within or contiguous to the sphere of influence.” (Gov. Code, § 56430(a)(2).) SB 244 generally requires cities and counties to address the infrastructure needs of unincorporated disadvantaged communities in city and county general plans. For cities and counties, SB 244 requires that, before the due date for adoption of the next housing element after January 1, 2012, the general plan land use element must be updated to:
▪ Identify unincorporated disadvantaged communities.
▪ Analyze for each identified community the water, wastewater, stormwater drainage, and structural fire protection needs.
▪ Identify financial funding alternatives for the extension of services to identified communities.
Local Regulations
2000-2020 Redding General Plan
Community Development and Design Element
▪ Goal CDD1 : Encourage urban growth to occur within the City and provide a development pattern that establishes an orderly urban service area.
Packet Pg. 1471
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
PLACEWORKS 5.17-3
o Policy CDD1F : Generally oppose development of community septic systems or temporary sewage disposal facilities within the Sphere of Influence.
Public Facilities and Services Element
▪ Goal PF1 : Ensure that adequate public services and facilities are available to support development in an efficient and orderly manner .
o Policy PF1 A: Require that all new development, including major modifications to existing development, construct necessary on -site infrastructure to serve the project in accordance with City standards.
o Policy PF1B : Require that all new development, including major modifications to existing development, construct or provide a fair share contribution toward the construction of any off-site improvements necessary to offset project impacts and/or support the project.
o Policy PF1C: When reviewing applications for land use designation changes (i.e. zone change, General Plan Amendment, Specific Plan), conduct a thorough analysis of the impacts of the proposed changes on all aspects of the City's infrastructure system, and require mitigation as appropriate.
o Policy PF1D: Require that the provision of streets, sewer, electric, water, drainage, and other needed infrastructure be coordinated in a logical manner between adjacent developments so as to reduce design, construction and maintenance costs. o Policy PF1E: Require that infrastructure be designed and constructed to meet ultimate capacity needs, pursuant to a master plan, so as to avoid the need for costly retrofitting. o Policy PF1F: Utilize reimbursement agreements, where appropriate, when upgraded or oversized facilities are installed by an individual developer and the cost of the facilities exceeds the development's proportional share of responsibility. o Policy PF1G: Direct growth toward areas which already have infrastructure capacity available by providing incentives for quality infill development and services. o Policy PF1H: Encourage clustering of development to maximize the use and efficiency of infrastructure facilities.
o Policy PF1I: Regularly update and adopt the City's Capital Improvement Program (CIP) to prioritize funding for public works projects in accordance with the General Plan. o Policy PF1J: Recognize the considerable public investment made in existing utility and street infrastructure by ensuring that funding for maintaining its integrity, reliability, and service levels is on par with investment in new facilities. ▪ Goal PF6: Maintain an adequate level of service in the City’s sewage collection and treatment systems to meet existing and future needs.
Packet Pg. 1472
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
5.17-4 FEBRUARY 2024
o Policy PF6A: Establish the following thresholds for sewer facilities:
▪ Program planned expansion activities when a trunk line, interceptor line, or lift station reaches 75 percent of capacity.
▪ Program planned expansion activities, when an existing wastewater treatment plant reaches 75 percent capacity based on dry weather flows on an ongoing basis.
o Policy PF6B : Monitor operation of the sewage collection and treatment system to determine when upgrading or expansion of the system is necessary to serve development demands.
o Policy PF6C: Develop and implement a regular program for replacing and upgrading deteriorated and undersized sewer lines to reduce inflow and infiltration into the system.
o Policy PF6E: Develop a market and the ability to deliver reclaimed water for appropriate uses.
▪ Goal PF20: Achieve and maintain adopted facility and service standards through the use of equitable funding methods and innovative strategies.
o Policy PF20A : Determine the demand for new public facilities created by new development as compared to the demand for new facilities created by the community as a whole. Based on the results, determine the "fair share" of the financial contributions that are appropria te for both the community at large and new development.
o Policy PF20B : Prepare an updated impact fee ordinance that requires new development to pay its "fair share" of the cost to build needed public facility improvements. Facilities to be considered include, but are not limited to: public safety, parks, streets and intersections, water treatment and distribution, sewage collection and wastewater treatment, storm drainage, transit, and electric facilities. o Policy PF20C: Where appropriate, distribute the responsibility to pay for new public facilities between existing and future development based on their respective demands on the system.
o Policy PF20D : Identify and pursue alternative funding sources that can be used for capital improvement project construction, staffing and ongoing maintenance of public improvements. Expand the search for grant funding.
o Policy PF20E: Require the preparation of a fiscal impact analysis for all specific plans or significant general plan land use amendments and annexations. The analysis will examine the fiscal impacts on the City and other service providers that result from large scale development. The fiscal analysis shall project a positive fiscal impact form new Packet Pg. 1473
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
PLACEWORKS 5.17-5
development or include mechanisms to fund projected fiscal deficits. Exceptions may be made when new development generates significant public benefits (e.g., low - income housing, primary-wage-earner employment) and when alternative sources of funding can be obtained to offset foregone revenues.
Wastewater Connection Fees
The City of Redding charges new developments a Wastewater Connection Fee ; the fee is $6,207 per household equivalent as of July 1, 2022 (Redding 2022a).
Redding Municipal Code
Chapter 14.16, Sewers, of the Redding Municipal Code provides regulations to set forth the uniform requirements for contributions to the City’s wastewater collection facilities and wastewater treatment facilities by all users thereof. These regulations enable the City to comply with applicable state and federal laws required by the Clean Water Act. The objectives of this Chapter are:
▪ To provide revenue for funding maintenance, operation, replacement, improvement, and extension of the City’s publicly owned treatment works (POTW);
▪ To provide for regulation and control of sewer connections; ▪ To prevent the introduction of pollutants into the City’s sewer collection system that may interfere with the POTW;
▪ To provide for the protection and well-being of personnel associated with wastewater transmission and treatment and the general public;
▪ To enable the City to comply with its National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit conditions, sludge use and disposal requirements, and any other federal or state laws to which the POTW is subject.
City of Redding 2022 Wastewater Utility Master Plan
The 2022 Wastewater Utility Master Plan addresses the City’s wastewater collection and treatment system needs for existing conditions, as well as for planning periods of 2027, 2032, and Ultimate Buildout. The Master Plan addresses both collection system and wa stewater treatment facilities for the Clear Creek and Stillwater service areas (Redding 2022b).
Packet Pg. 1474
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
5.17-6 FEBRUARY 2024
Existing Conditions
Wastewater Treatment
Clear Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant
The Clear Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) opened in 1966 and was substantially upgraded in 1978, 1990, 1996, and as recently as 2014 . The Clear Creek Treatment plant is located at 2220 Metz Road .
Operators treat influent wastewater to high-quality standards, ensuring that stringent water quality criteria are met and that public health and the environment are protected. The Clear Creek WWTP is operated and maintained safely and in compliance with National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit limits and best management practices (BMPs) (Redding 2022c). The average dry weather design flow is 9.4 million gallons/day (mgd) and the peak wet weather flow is 40+ mgd (Redding 2022c).
Stillwater Wastewater Treatment Plant
The Stillwater WWTP was opened in 1992 and a plant expansion was completed in 2014. Stillwater Treatment Plant is located at 6475 Airport Road. In 2020, numerous upgrades and equipment replacements were completed including the replacement of the disinfection dosing equipment, and toxic gas scrubber, as well as the installing a new odor control biofilter . Operators treat influent to high-quality standards, ensuring that stringent water quality criteria are met and that public health and the environment are protected. The Stillwater WWTP is safely operated and maintained in compliance with NPDES permit limits and BMPs (Redding 2022d). The average dry weather design flow is 4 mgd and the peak wet weather flow is 14.4 mgd (Redding 2022d).
Wastewater Collection
The Collection Division maintains 18 public sewer lift stations, 442 miles (2,333333,676 feet) of public sewer lines, and 8,167167 manholes. Each year, more than 408 miles (4,154,240 feet) of sewer lines are cleaned, and more than 173 miles (913,440 feet) of sewer lines are TV/video inspected each year (Redding 2022e).
The Collection Division’s goal is to maintain the current system and plan for the future needs of the community, while continually striving to reduce sewer line blockages and eliminate sanitary sewer overflows. The Collection Division staff uses a variety of technology to monitor and repair the system. The public sewer system does not include the sewer laterals that connect homes and businesses to the public system; those laterals are private facilities and must be maintained by the property owner (Redding 2022e).
Figure 5.17-1, City of Redding Wastewater Treatment and Collection, shows the locations of the sewer lines, the Clear Creek and Stillwater WWTPs and sewer zones, and sewer manholes.
Packet Pg. 1475
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding) §¨¦
I-5
£¤299
£¤
299
£¤
44 §¨¦
I-5
STILLWATERTWINVIEW
NORTH REDDING
REDDING
CASCADE
ENTERPRISE
Lift Station #2
Lift Station #5
Lift Station #3
Locust Lift Station
Westside Lift Station
Hartnell Lift Station
Remington Lift Station
Abernathy Lift Station
Sunnyhill Lift Station
Auditorium Lift Station
River Bend Lift Station
Tierra Oaks Lift Station
Mary Street Lift Station
Churn Creek Lift Station
No. Market Street Lift Station
STILLWATER
WASTEWATER
TREATMENT PLANT
CLEAR CREEK
WASTEWATER
TREATMENT PLANT
Legend
TRIBUTARY ZONE
CASCADE
ENTERPRISE
NORTH REDDING
REDDING
STILLWATER
TWINVIEW
CLEAR CREEK SEWERZONE
STILLWATER SEWERZONE
MANHOLE (7946)
! LIFT STATION (17)
$ WASTEWATER TREATMENT
WASTEWATER PIPE (431.5 MILES)
CITY LIMITS
-
Source: City of Reddding, 2015.
Figure 5.17-1
City of Redding Wastewater Treatment and Collection
0 Scale (Miles)
1.75 5
5 44
299
299
REDDING GENERAL PLAN UPDATE DRAFT EIR
CITY OF REDDING
5.17 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
PLA C EW O RK S
Legend
TRIBUTARY ZONE
CASCADE
ENTERPRISE
NORTH REDDING
REDDING
STILLWATER
TWINVIEW
CLEAR CREEK SEWERZONE
STILLWATER SEWERZONE
MANHOLE (7946)
! LIFT STATION (17)
$ WASTEWATER TREATMENT
WASTEWATER PIPE (431.5 MILES)
CITY LIMITS
Cascade
Enterprise
North Redding
Redding
Stillwater
Twinview
Clear Creek Sewerzone
Stillwater Sewerzone
Manhole (7,946)
Lift Station (17)
Wastewater Treatment
Wastewater Pipe (431.5 Miles)
City Limits
Tributary Zone
LEGEND
Packet Pg. 1476
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
5.17-8 FEBRUARY 2024
This page intentionally left blank.
Packet Pg. 1477
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
PLACEWORKS 5.17-9
THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
According to Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, a project would normally have a significant effect on the environment if the project:
UTIL-1 Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded wastewater treatment facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects.
UTIL-2 Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments.
UTIL-3 In combination with past, present, and reasonably foreseeable projects, result in a cumulative impact with respect to wastewater facilities.
PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN POLICIES
The following policies of the 2023 -2045 General Plan Update are relevant to wastewater treatment and collection.
Community Development and Design Element
▪ Policy CDD1F: Generally oppose development of community septic systems, wastewater package plants, and/or temporary sewage disposal facilities within the Primary and Secondary Growth areas for developments within the jurisdiction of Shasta County. Exceptions include situations where public health and safety concerns, with existing development, need to be addressed.
Environmental Justice Element
▪ Policy EJ5F : Increase citizen awareness and implementation of water and energy efficiency, weatherization, disaster risk reduction, climate change adaptation and mitigation, wildfire smoke protection, and safety from extreme heat through public engagement, incentives, and assistance with a special focus on underserved residents and areas with vulnerable populations. ▪ Policy EJ6A: Work proactively with residents as appropriate to ensure existing and new public facilities, infrastructure, services are addressed in a manner that reflects the community’s needs and shifting priorities of future demands in an equitable manner, to the extent feasible. ▪ Policy EJ6B: Coordinate with water, sewer, solid waste, electricity, police, and fire service providers to provide continuation of efficient and effective service, delivery, operations, and maintenance.
Identify and prevent potential system vulnerabilities and coordinate with partnering agencies that provide public facilities to establish response teams or contingency plans in case of failure or emergency.
Packet Pg. 1478
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
5.17-10 FEBRUARY 2024
Public Facilities and Services Element
▪ Policy PF1A: Require all new development, including major modifications to existing development, construct necessary on -site infrastructure to serve the project in accordance with the City standards.
▪ Policy PF1B: Consider requiring Require all new development, including major modifications to existing development, to construct or provide a fair share contribution toward the construction of any off-site improvements necessary to offset project impacts and/or support the project ensuring that established service levels are maintained.
▪ Policy PF1C: When reviewing applications for land use designation changes (i.e. zone change, General Plan Amendment, Specific Plan), the City may require that a thorough analysis of the impacts of the proposed changes on the City's infrastructure system be provided and that mitigation be required as appropriate.
▪ Policy PF1D : Require that the provision of streets, sewer, electric, water, drainage, and other needed infrastructure be coordinated in a logical manner between adjacent developments so as to reduce design, construction and maintenance costs.
▪ Policy PF1E: Work toward r equiring Require that infrastructure be designed and constructed to meet ultimate capacity needs, pursuant to a master plan, so as to avoid the need for expensive retrofitting to the extent feasible.
▪ Policy PF5A: Adhere to the following thresholds for sewer facilities to the extent feasible:
o Program planned expansion activities, when a trunk line, interceptor line, or lift station reaches 75 percent of capacity.
o Program planned expansion activities, when an existing wastewater treatment plant reaches 75 percent capacity based on dry weather flows on an ongoing basis. o Periodically review and update the Wastewater Utility Masterplan to guide long -range planning, design, and development of the wastewater system infrastructure. ▪ Policy PF5B: Monitor the operation of the sewage collection and treatment system to determine when upgrading or expansion of the system is necessary to serve development demands. ▪ Policy PF5C: Work to develop and implement a regular program for replacing and upgrading deteriorated and undersized sewer lines to reduce inflow and infiltration into the system. ▪ Policy PF5D: Dispose wastewater biosolids through appropriate techniques consistent with standard industry practices as permitted by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board and other approving/ regulatory bodies.
▪ Policy PF5E: Consider investigating the feasibility of utilizing reclaimed water through environmentally sustainable practices. Work to d evelop a market and the ability to deliver reclaimed water for identified uses as appropriate.
Packet Pg. 1479
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
PLACEWORKS 5.17-11
▪ Policy PF14A: Through nexus studies determine the demand for new public facilities created by new development as compared to the demand for new facilities created by the community as a whole.
Based on the results, determine the "fair share" of the financial contributions that are appropriate for both the community at large and new development.
▪ Policy PF14B: Update as necessary the ordinance for development impact fees that obligates new development to pay its "fair share" of the cost to build needed public facility improvements. ▪ Policy PF14C : Where appropriate, distribute the responsibility to pay for new public facilities between existing and future development based on their respective demands on the system. ▪ Policy PF14D: Strive to identify Continue to identify and pursue alternative funding sources that can be used for: capital improvement project construction, staffing and ongoing maintenance of public improvements. Expand the search for grant funding.
▪ Policy PF14E: As appropriate, request the preparation of a fiscal impact analysis for all specific plans or significant general plan land use amendments and annexations. The analysis will examine the fiscal impacts on the City and other service providers that result from large scale development. The fiscal analysis shall project a positive fiscal impact form new development or include mechanisms to fund projected fiscal deficits. Exceptions may be made when new development generates significant public benefits (e.g., low-income housing, primary-wage-earner employment) and when alternative sources of funding can be obtained to offset foregone revenues.
IMPACT DISCUSSION
UTIL-1 Sewer and wastewater treatment systems have adequate capacity to meet project requirements , and would not result in the need for new or expanded wastewater treatment facilities. [Thresholds UTIL-1 and UTIL-2] Under the proposed project, existing land use classifications and configurations would remain unaffected.
As such, implementation of the proposed project would not require or result in the construction of new wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities. As the City continues to grow, as described in Table 3-2, 2045 General Plan Planning Horizon Forecast, in Chapter 3, Project Description, the City would ensure that all new development is provided wastewater services and all environmental impacts associated with the expansion or development of wastewater treatment facilities, if applicable, is evaluated. Planning and construction of new or expanded wastewater facilities to accommodate new development is an on - going process for any area where future growth is anticipated.
In correspondence with the City of Redding Public Work’s Department, it was noted that the department currently meets the wastewater treatment and collection demands of its service area. The department notes that depending on the area of growth, a modeling assessment of the projected flows and an evaluation of the loading at the respective treatment plants would be required in order to determine what infrastructure improvements would be needed. The department recommends continuing to conduct a Packet Pg. 1480
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
5.17-12 FEBRUARY 2024
Utility Master Plan update every 10 years to evaluate the collection system and treatment facilities for future needs. In addition the Department notes the importance of designing a rate structure and impact fee program sufficient revenue for future projects as growth occurs (Appendix 5.15-1).
As stated in the 2022 Wastewater Utility Master Plan, improvements would be made to the City’s wastewater collection and treatment system for both the Clear Creek and Stillwater service areas.
Improvements include, but are not limited to, upgrading old pipelines, increasing the diameter size of pipes, and increasing the capacities of collection facilities (Redding 2022b). As such, these improvements could increase the City’s ability to collect and treat increased wastewater generated under the proposed project.
Moreover, the proposed 2023-2045 General Plan Update includes the following policies from the Public Facilities Element that require all new development to be served by the City’s wastewater system and provide standards for assessing the impacts from future development:
▪ Policy PF1A : Require that all new development, including major modifications to existing development, construct necessary on -site infrastructure to serve the project in accordance with the City standards.
▪ Policy PF1B: Consider requiring Require all new development, including major modifications to existing development, to construct or provide a fair share contribution toward the construction of any off-site improvements necessary to offset project impacts and/or support the project ensuring that established service levels are maintained.
▪ Policy PF1C : When reviewing applications for land use designation changes (i.e. zone change, General Plan Amendment, Specific Plan), the City may require that a thorough analysis of the impacts of the proposed changes on the City's infrastructure system, and require mitigation as appropriate.
▪ Policy PF1D : Require that the provision of streets, sewer, electric, water, drainage, and other needed infrastructure be coordinated in a logical manner between adjacent developments so as to reduce design, construction and maintenance costs.
▪ Policy PF1E: Work toward r equiring Require that infrastructure be designed and constructed to meet ultimate capacity needs, pursuant to a master plan, so as to avoid the need for expensive retrofitting to the extent feasible.
▪ Policy PF5A: Adhere to the following thresholds for sewer facilities to the extent feasible:
o Program planned expansion activities, when a trunk line, interceptor line, or lift station reaches 75 percent of capacity.
o Program planned expansion activities, when an existing wastewater treatment plant reaches 75 percent capacity based on dry weather flows on an ongoing basis. o Periodically review and update the Wastewater Utility Masterplan to guide long -range planning, design, and development of the wastewater system infrastructure.
Packet Pg. 1481
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
PLACEWORKS 5.17-13
▪ Policy PF5B: Monitor the operation of the sewage collection and treatment system to determine when upgrading or expansion of the system is necessary to serve development demands. ▪ Policy PF5C : Work to develop and implement a regular program for replacing and upgrading deteriorated and undersized sewer lines to reduce inflow and infiltration into the system. ▪ Policy PF5D : Dispose wastewater biosolids through appropriate techniques consistent with standard industry practices as permitted by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board and other approving/ regulatory bodies.
▪ Policy PF5E : Consider investigating the feasibility of utilizing reclaimed water through environmentally sustainable practices. Work to develop a market and the ability to deliver reclaimed water for identified uses as appropriate.
This EIR is a programmatic document and does not evaluate the environmental impacts of any project - specific development. Any new or expanded wastewater facilities, if needed, would be considered a project- specific development and would come under the direct regulatory authority of the Regional Water Quality Control Board. Additionally, such projects would be analyzed in accordance with CEQA.
In conjunction with applicable state regulatory requirements and the proposed General Plan Update polices, implementation of the proposed project would be adequately served by wastewater treatment facilities by ensuring sufficient capacity is available to serve the proposed project’s demand . Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
Level of Significance Before Mitigation: Impact UTIL-1 would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.
CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
UTIL-2 Implementation of the proposed project would not result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments [Threshold UTIL-3].
Development allowed by the 2023-2045 General Plan would generate increased amounts of wastewater in the City. However, several policies included in the 2023 -2045 General Plan would ensure that the City’s wastewater treatment system will have adequate capacity to meet future demand. These include the following policies that aim to sufficiently fund the City’s wastewater treatment system:
Packet Pg. 1482
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
5.17-14 FEBRUARY 2024
▪ Policy PF14A: Through nexus studies determine the demand for new public facilities created by new development as compared to the demand for new facilities created by the community as a whole.
Based on the results, determine the "fair share" of the financial contributions that are appropriate for both the community at large and new development.
▪ Policy PF14B: Update as necessary the ordinance for Development Impact Fees that obligates new development to pay its "fair share" of the cost to build needed public facility improvements. ▪ Policy PF14C : Where appropriate, distribute the responsibility to pay for new public facilities between existing and future development based on their respective demands on the system. ▪ Policy PF14D: Strive to identify Continue to identify and pursue alternative funding sources that can be used for capital improvement project construction, staffing and ongoing maintenance of public improvements. Endeavor to expand the search for grant funding. ▪ Policy PF14E: As appropriate, request the preparation of a fiscal impact analysis for all specific plans or significant general plan land use amendments and annexations. The analysis will examine the fiscal impacts on the City and other service providers that result from large scale development. The fiscal analysis shall project a positive fiscal impact form new development or include mechanisms to fund projected fiscal deficits. Exceptions may be made when new development generates significant public benefits (e.g., low-income housing, primary-wage-earner employment) and when alternative sources of funding can be obtained to offset foregone revenues.
As noted in impact UTIL -1, t he City of Redding Public Work's Department is currently meeting the wastewater treatment and collection demands of its service area. However, if growth occurs, a modeling assessment of projected flows and loading at the respective treatment plants would be needed. In addition, as with the project-level analysis, any new or expanded wastewater facilities would be subject to project - specific review under CEQA and the direct regulatory authority of the RWQCB, and would require a Report of Waste Discharge to be filed and issuance of new or modified WDRs by the RWQCB.
The processes and requirements described in this section will ensure that the cumulative impacts related to wastewater would be less than significant.
Level of Significance Before Mitigation: Impact UTIL-2 would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.
Packet Pg. 1483
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
PLACEWORKS 5.17-15
5.17.2 WATER SUPPLY AND DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMS
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Regulatory Framework
State Regulations
California Water Code
To assist with water suppliers, cities, and counties in integrating water and land use planning, the state passes Senate Bill (SB) 610, which is codified in the California Water Code Section 10910. The lead agency preparing a CEQA document shall identify any water system whose service area includes a project site and any water system adjacent to a project site that is, or may become, a public water system that may supply water for a project. If the lead agency is not able to identify any public water system that may supply water for a project, then the lead agency shall prepare a water assessment.
Urban Water Management Planning Act
In accordance with California Water Code, §10610-10656 and §10608 every urban water supplier that either provides over 3,000 acre -feet of water annually or serves more than 3,000 urban connections is required to submit an Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP). The Plan is prepared by urban water suppliers every five years to support the suppliers’ long -term resource planning to ensure that adequate water supplies are available to meet the existing and future water needs.
California Green Building Standards Code
Part 11 of the Title 24 Building Energy Efficiency Standards is referred to as the California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen Code). The CALGreen Code is intended to encourage more sustainable and environmentally-friendly building practices, conser ve natural resources, and promote the use of energy - efficient materials and equipment. Since 2011, the CALGreen Code has been mandatory for all new residential and non -residential buildings constructed in the state. Mandatory measures related to water conservation include water-conserving plumbing fixture and appliance requirements, including flow rate maximums, compliance with state and local water-efficient landscape standards for outdoor potable water use in landscape areas, and recycled water systems, where available. The CALGreen Code was most recently updated in 2022 and became effective January 1, 2023.
State Model Landscape Ordinance
The California Water Conservation in Landscaping Act, also known as the State Landscape Model Ordinance, was amended pursuant to Assembly Bill (AB) 2717 and AB 1881. AB 2717 required the Department of Water Resources (DWR) to adopt a model local water effi cient landscape ordinance that each local agency may Packet Pg. 1484
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
5.17-16 FEBRUARY 2024
adopt and requires local agencies to adopt a water efficient landscape ordinance. AB 1881 required cities and counties to adopt landscape water conservation ordinances by January 31, 2010, or to adopt a different ordinance that was at least as effective in conserving water as the California Updated Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (MWELO).
DWR updated the MWELO in 2015, consistent with the Governor’s Executive Order B -29-15. The updated MWELO requires cities and counties to adopt landscape water conservation ordinance by February 1, 2016, or to adopt a different ordinance that is at least as effective in conserving water as the updated Model Ordinance. Residential, commercial, industrial, and institutional projects that include landscaped ar eas of 500 square feet or more must be MWELO-compliant (23 Cal. Code Regs. §§ 490 et seq.).
Assembly Bill 1668 (AB 1668) and Senate Bill 606 (SB 606)- Water Management Planning AB 1668 and SB 606 build on Governor Brown’s ongoing efforts to make water conservation a way of life in California and create a new foundation for long -term improvements in water conservation and drought planning. SB 606 and AB 1668 establish guidelines f or efficient water use and a framework for the implementation and oversight of the new standards. These two bills strengthen the state’s water resiliency in the face of future droughts with provisions that include:
▪ Establishing water use objectives and long -term standards for efficient water use that apply to urban retail water suppliers comprised of indoor residential water use, outdoor residential water use, commercial, industrial and institutional (CII) irrigation with dedicated meters, water loss, and other unique local uses.
▪ Providing incentives for water suppliers to recycle water . ▪ Identifying small water suppliers and rural communities that may be at risk of drought and water shortage vulnerability and provide recommendations for drought planning. ▪ Requiring both urban and agricultural water suppliers to set annual water budgets and prepare for drought.
Local Regulations
2000-2020 Redding General Plan
Public Facilities and Services Element
▪ Goal PF1 : Ensure that adequate public services and facilities are available to support development in an efficient and orderly manner .
o Policy PF1: Require that all new development, including major modifications to existing development, construct necessary on -site infrastructure to serve the project in accordance with City standards.
Packet Pg. 1485
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
PLACEWORKS 5.17-17
o Policy PF1B : Require that all new development, including major modifications to existing development, construct or provide a fair share contribution toward the construction of any off-site improvements necessary to offset project impacts and/or support the project.
o Policy PF1C: When reviewing applications for land use designation changes (i.e. zone change, General Plan Amendment, Specific Plan), conduct a thorough analysis of the impacts of the proposed changes on all aspects of the City's infrastructure system, and require mitigation as appropriate.
o Policy PF1D: Require that the provision of streets, sewer, electric, water, drainage, and other needed infrastructure be coordinated in a logical manner between adjacent developments so as to reduce design, construction and maintenance costs. o Policy PF1E: Require that infrastructure be designed and constructed to meet ultimate capacity needs, pursuant to a master plan, so as to avoid the need for costly retrofitting. o Policy PF1F: Utilize reimbursement agreements, where appropriate, when upgraded or oversized facilities are installed by an individual developer and the cost of the facilities exceeds the development's proportional share of responsibility. o Policy PF1G: Direct growth toward areas which already have infrastructure capacity available by providing incentives for quality infill development. o Policy PF1H: Encourage clustering of development to maximize the use and efficiency of infrastructure facilities.
o Policy PF1I: Regularly update and adopt the City's Capital Improvement Program (CIP) to prioritize funding for public works projects in accordance with the General Plan. o Policy PF1J: Recognize the considerable public investment made in existing utility and street infrastructure by ensuring that funding for maintaining its integrity, reliability, and service levels is on par with investment in new facilities. ▪ Goal PF5: Maintain an adequate level of service in the City’s water system to meet existing and future needs.
o Policy PF5A: Establish the following thresholds for water services and facilities:
▪ Program planned expansion activities, when demand at an existing treatment plant reaches within 10 percent plant capacity.
▪ Reservoir capacity should be maintained at 20 percent of maximum day demand.
▪ Develop additional water supplies from wells at least two years prior to a projected water deficit.
Packet Pg. 1486
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
5.17-18 FEBRUARY 2024
o Policy PF5B : Develop and maintain a regular program for systematically replacing deteriorated or deficient water pipes.
o Policy PF5C : Require water distribution systems to be interconnected ("looped") wherever feasible to facilitate the reliable delivery of water anywhere in the City. o Policy PF5D: Immediately begin the process to acquire additional allocations from the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation.
o Policy PF5E : Be actively involved in surface water adjudication which could have a negative impact on the City’s water rights and/or allocation. o Policy PF5F: Periodically update the City’s Master Water Plan to reflect changes to the General Plan General Plan Diagram, water use pattern changes, regulatory changes, or other circumstances.
▪ Goal PF20: Achieve and maintain adopted facility and service standards through the use of equitable funding methods and innovative strategies.
o Policy PF20A : Determine the demand for new public facilities created by new development as compared to the demand for new facilities created by the community as a whole. Based on the results, determine the "fair share" of the financial contributions that are appropriate for both the community at large and new development.
o Policy PF20B : Prepare an updated impact fee ordinance that requires new development to pay its "fair share" of the cost to build needed public facility improvements. Facilities to be considered include, but are not limited to: public safety, parks, streets and intersections, water treatment and distribution, sewage collect ion and wastewater treatment, storm drainage, transit, and electric facilities. o Policy PF20C: Where appropriate, distribute the responsibility to pay for new public facilities between existing and future development based on their respective demands on the system.
o Policy PF20D: Identify and pursue alternative funding sources that can be used for:
capital improvement project construction, staffing and ongoing maintenance of public improvements. Expand the search for grant funding.
o Policy PF20E: Require the preparation of a fiscal impact analysis for all specific plans or significant general plan land use amendments and annexations. The analysis will examine the fiscal impacts on the City and other service providers that result from large scale development. The fiscal analysis shall project a positive fiscal impact form new development or include mechanisms to fund projected fiscal deficits. Exceptions may be made when new development generates significant public benefits (e.g., low - income housing, primary-wage-earner employment) and when alternative sources of funding can be obtained to offset foregone revenues.
Packet Pg. 1487
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
PLACEWORKS 5.17-19
2020 Urban Water Management Plan
The purpose of the Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) is to maintain efficient use of water supplies, continue to promote conservation programs and policies, ensure that sufficient water supplies are available for future beneficial use, and provide a mechanism for response during water drought conditions. The City recognizes the importance of maintaining a high -quality reliable water supply. Although water is a renewable resource, it is limited. A long -term reliable supply of water is essential to protect t he local and state economy. The main focus for the City is to provide high quality water, maximize the efficient use of water, and promote conservation (Redding 2021).
Redding Municipal Code
City ordinances regarding water service are set forth in City Municipal Code Chapter 14.08, Water. The City’s Water Shortage Contingency Plan (WSCP) is set forth in Municipal Code Chapter 14.09 , Water Shortage Contingency Plan . The WSCP consists of six stages. Stage 1 consists of Year -Round Water Conservation Measures (Voluntary Water Conservation Practices and Best Management Practices) . Stages 2 through 4 are moderate, medium, and severe water shortage conditions, respectively. Stage 5 is critical water shortage conditions and Stage 6 is emergency water shortage conditions.
Water Connection Fees
The City of Redding charges new developments a Water Connection Fee; the fee is $5,231 per household equivalent as of July 1, 2022 (Redding 2022a).
Existing Conditions
Water Providers
The City of Redding is served by three different water providers including the City of Redding Water Utility, which serves the largest portion of the Planning Area; Bella Vista Water District, which serves a portion in the northeast Planning Area in additi on to the unincorporated area of Bella Vista; and Centerville Community Services District which provides water service to a southwestern portion of the Planning Area and the unincorporated Centerville community.
Redding Water Utility
Water Sources
The City of Redding Water Utility has two major sources of drinking water: surface water and groundwater .
The Sacramento River and Whiskeytown Lake provide the City’s customers with 74 percent of the water they use, which is approximately 7.25 billion gallons per year (Redding 2022f). The remaining 26 percent, or 2.51 billion gallons per year, is groundwater which comes from 16 wells drilled into the Redding Groundwater Basin. Figure 5.17-2, Water Pipes, shows the existing water pipes in the city.
Packet Pg. 1488
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
5.17-20 FEBRUARY 2024
Surface Water
The City’s main contract with the United States Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) allows a maximum annual diversion of 21,000 acre-feet (af) or 18.7 million gallons per day (mgd) (Redding 2022f). In addition, the City also has a smaller contract with the USBR for water to serve the Buckeye area–the northwest portion of the City’s service area. This contract allows for a maximum annual diversion of 6,1 10,140 af or 5.4 mgd, from Whiskeytown Lake (Redding 2022f). All surface water is treated at one of two water treatment faciliti es owned by the City of Redding.
Packet Pg. 1489
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding) Source: City of Reddding, 2021.
Figure 5.17-2
Water Pipes
44 299
Water Pipes
City Boundaries Bella Vista Water District
(Data Unavailable)
5.17 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
REDDING GENERAL PLAN UPDATE DRAFT EIR
CITY OF REDDING
PLA C EW O RK S
5 5
299
CALIFORNIA
UnincorporatedUnincorporated
Shasta CountyShasta County
UnincorporatedUnincorporated
Shasta CountyShasta County
Keswick
Reservoir
0 Scale (Miles)
1.5 Packet Pg. 1490
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
5.17-22 FEBRUARY 2024
This page intentionally left blank.
Packet Pg. 1491
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
PLACEWORKS 5.17-23
Groundwater
The City’s 16 wells are located in the southwest and southeast portion of the City’s service area–the Cascade and Enterprise zones. There are four wells in the Cascade Zone and 12 wells in the Enterprise Zone. These wells pump water from an underground aquifer and are used primarily during summer when the demand is high. Water pumped from the groundwater basin is of good quality and only minimal disinfection and treatment is necessary before the water enters our distribution system (Redding 2022f).
Water Treatment Plants
The City has two water treatment plants ––Foothill and Buckeye Water Treatment Plants. Foothill Water Treatment Plant has a treatment capacity of 24 mgd and Buckeye Water Treatment Plant has a treatment capacity of 14 mgd (Redding 2022f). The Foothill Water Treatment Plant is located at 3105 Foothill Boulevard. The Buckeye Water Treatment Plant is located at 11501 Benson Drive.
Projected Water Supply and Demand
Table 5.17-1, City of Redding Projected Water Supply and Demand, shows the projected water supply and demand in the City from 2025 through 2045. As shown in Table 5.17-1, the City’s water supplies exceed the water demands from 2025 through 2045.
TABLE 5.17-1 CITY OF REDDING PROJECTED WATER SUPPLY AND DEMAND Water Supply1
Water Supply Additional Detail 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 Purchased or Imported Water USBR 8,844 8,844 8,844 8,844 8,844 Groundwater (not desalinated) 4,236 4,334 4,334 4,334 4,334 Transfers ACID 1,303 1,303 1,303 1,303 1,303
Total Water Supply (mg) 14,383 14,481 14,481 14,481 14,481 Total Water Demand (mg)2 8,797 8,797 9,181 9,382 9,587
Difference 5,586 5,684 5,300 5,099 4,894
Source: Redding 2021 (Table 4-2 and Table 6-9 of 2020 UWMP).
Notes:
USBR = United States Bureau of Reclamation.
ACID = Anderson-Cottonwood Irrigation District.
Units of measure in the 2020 UWMP are million gallons (mg). 1 Water supply assumes reasonably available volume.
2 Recycled water demands are not included; water demand includes losses and sales/transfers/exchanges to other agencies.
Table 5.17-2, Single Dry Year Supply and Demand (Redding Water Utility), and Table 5.1 7-3, Multiple Dry Years Supply and Demand (Redding Water Utility), show the City’s water supplies and demands over the 2025-2045 period in single-dry-year and multiple dry years, respectively. As shown in Table 5.17-2 and Table
5.17-3, the City’s water supplies exceed the demand.
Packet Pg. 1492
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
5.17-24 FEBRUARY 2024
TABLE 5.17-2 SINGLE DRY YEAR SUPPLY AND DEMAND (REDDING WATER UTILITY)
2025 2030 2035 2040 2045
Supply Totals 14,057 14,357 14,357 14,357 14,357
Demand Totals 7,858 8,023 8,192 8,364 8,539
Difference 6,199 6,334 6,165 5,993 5,818
Source: Redding 2021 (Table 7-3).
Units of measure in the 2020 UWMP are million gallons (mg).
TABLE 5.17-3 MULTIPLE DRY YEARS SUPPLY AND DEMAND (REDDING WATER UTILITY) First Year
2025 2030 2035 2040 2045
Supply Totals 12,157 12,357 12,357 12,357 12,357
Demand Totals 7,858 8,023 8,192 8,364 8,539
Difference 4,299 4,334 4,165 3,993 3,818
Second Year
Supply Totals 12,157 12,357 12,357 12,357 12,357
Demand Totals 7,858 8,023 8,192 8,364 8,539
Difference 4,299 4,334 4,165 3,993 3,818
Third Year
Supply Totals 12,157 12,357 12,357 12,357 12,357
Demand Totals 7,858 8,023 8,192 8,364 8,539
Difference 4,299 4,334 4,165 3,993 3,818
Fourth Year
Supply Totals 12,157 12,357 12,357 12,357 12,357
Demand Totals 7,858 8,023 8,192 8,364 8,539
Difference 4,299 4,334 4,165 3,993 3,818
Fifth Year
Supply Totals 12,157 12,357 12,357 12,357 12,357
Demand Totals 7,858 8,023 8,192 8,364 8,539
Difference 4,299 4,334 4,165 3,993 3,818
Source: Redding 2021 (Table 7-4).
Units of measure in the 2020 UWMP are million gallons (mg).
Bella Vista Water District
Water Sources
Bella Vista Water District’s (BVWD’s) water supply is a combination of a long-term renewable water service contract with the United States Bureau of Reclamation, groundwater, and a long-term transfer agreement with the Anderson-Cottonwood Irrigation District. The District also occasionally enters into short-term water transfer agreements; typically, this only occurs during years when its Central Valley Project (CVP) contract supplies are severely reduced. The District also has interties with several local agencies in which emergency transfers of water can be made (BVWD 2021).
The primary water source for the Bella Vista Water District has historically been the C VP, but due to uncertain water supply and perhaps chronic shortages due to regulatory constraints that have revised CVP operations, reduced CVP yield, and supply allocation, the district is seeking alternative water sources to augment supply. BVWD‘s contract with Reclamation allows deliveries to the District of up to 24,578 acre- feet (AF) of water annually. Their contract Anderson-Cotton Irrigation District supplies an additional 1,536 Packet Pg. 1493
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
PLACEWORKS 5.17-25
AF of water annually. In total, a volume of 11,268 AF of water supplies was available to the District in 2020 (BVWD 2021).
Water Demand
The District’s 2020 UWMP reported a total of 6,273 active connections for 2020. Water uses include agriculture, residential, rural, and public/institutional. Average water use between 2016 and 2020 was 9,762 AF and the District projects that demand will ri se to 10,843 AF of water by 2045. The District’s single year projected supply and demand comparison is shown in Table 5.17 -4, Single Dry Year Supply and Demand (Bella Vista Water District). Table 5.17-5, Multiple Dry Years Supply and Demand (Bella Vista Water District), shows the District’s water supplies and demands over the 2025-2045 period in multiple dry years. As shown in Table 5.17-5, demand would exceed the District’s water supply in years 3 and 5.
TABLE 5.17-4 SINGLE DRY YEAR SUPPLY AND DEMAND (BELLA VISTA WATER DISTRICT)
2025 2030 2035 2040 2045
Supply Totals 10,309 11,309 11,309 11,309 11,309
Demand Totals 9,969 10,181 10,397 10,616 10,843
Difference 340 1,128 912 693 466
Source: BVWD 2021 (Table 7-5).
Units of measure in the 2020 UWMP are in acre-feet-year (AFY).
TABLE 5.17-5 MULTIPLE DRY YEARS SUPPLY AND DEMAND (BELLA VISTA WATER DISTRICT) First Year
2025 2030 2035 2040 2045
Supply Totals 22,020 22,020 22,020 22,020 22,020
Demand Totals 9,969 10,181 10,397 10,616 10,843
Difference 12,051 11,839 11,623 11,404 11,177
Second Year
Supply Totals 10,609 11,609 11,609 11,609 11,609
Demand Totals 10,011 10,224 10,441 10,661 10,889
Difference 598 1,385 1,168 948 720
Third Year
Supply Totals 8,459 9,359 9,359 9,359 9,359
Demand Totals 10,053 10,267 10,485 10,705 10,934
Difference (1,594) (908) (1,126) (1,346) (1,575)
Fourth Year
Supply Totals 10,109 10,909 10,909 10,909 10,909
Demand Totals 10,095 10,310 10,529 10,750 10,980
Difference 14 599 380 159 (71)
Fifth Year
Supply Totals 7,486 8,286 8,286 8,286 8,286
Demand Totals 10,138 10,353 10,573 10,795 11,026
Difference (2,652) (2,067) (2,287) (2,509) (2,740)
Source: BVWD 2021 (Table 7-6).
Units of measure in the 2020 UWMP are acre-feet-year (AFY).
Parentheses indicate negative values
Packet Pg. 1494
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
5.17-26 FEBRUARY 2024
Centerville Community Services District
The purpose of the Centerville Community Services District (CCSD), as set forth in the formation petition, is to supply the inhabitants with water for domestic, irrigation, sanitation, and industrial uses, recreation, as well as provide protection against fire. The District receives its water from Whiskeytown Lake through contracts with the US Bureau of Reclamation as part of the Central Valley Project system (CCSD 2023a). In March of 2023, the District announced that it had secured 100 percent of its water supplies after it was announced that the CVP had increased its water supply allocations (CCSD 2023b).
THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
According to Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, a project would normally have a significant effect on the environment if the project:
UTIL-4 Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects.
UTIL-5 Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry, and multiple dry years.
UTIL-6 In combination with past, present, and reasonably foreseeable projects, result in a cumulative impact with respect to water supply.
PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN POLICIES
The following goals and policies of the 2023 -2045 General Plan Update are relevant to water supply and distribution systems.
Community Design and Development Element
▪ Policy CDD2E: Maintain adequate capacity for urban growth and coordinate with service providers to ensure to the extent feasible that all public utility facilities and services required by development are available. The City shall undertake assessments of its facilities and services as necessary and may help facilitate the creation of assessment districts, where appropriate. Where public facilities are to be provided to development by a separate water or community services district, the City shall work to coordinate planning activities with such agencies and obtain a “will-serve” letter, to ensure that the development in accordance with this General Plan can be accommodated.
Community Health, Wellness, and Environmental Justice Element ▪ Policy EJ5F : Increase citizen awareness and implementation of water and energy efficiency, weatherization, disaster risk reduction, climate change adaptation and mitigation, wildfire smoke protection, and safety from extreme heat through public engagement, incentives, and assistance with a special focus on underserved residents and areas with vulnerable populations.
Packet Pg. 1495
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
PLACEWORKS 5.17-27
▪ Policy EJ6A: Work proactively with residents as appropriate, so that existing and new public facilities, infrastructure, services are addressed in a manner that reflects the community’s needs and shifting priorities of future demands in an equitable manner to the extent feasible. ▪ Policy EJ6B: Coordinate with water, sewer, waste management, electricity, police, and fire service providers to provide continuation of efficient and effective service, delivery, operations, and maintenance. Identify and prevent potential system vulnerabilities and coordinate with partnering agencies that provide public facilities to establish response teams or contingency plans in case of failure or emergency.
Public Facilities and Services Element
▪ Policy PF1A: Require all new development, including major modifications to existing development, construct necessary on -site infrastructure to serve the project in accordance with the City standards.
▪ Policy PF1B : Consider requiring Require all new development, including major modifications to existing development, to construct or provide a fair share contribution toward the construction of any off-site improvements necessary to offset project impacts and/or support the project ensuring that established service levels are maintained.
▪ Policy PF1C: When reviewing applications for land use designation changes (i.e. zone change, General Plan Amendment, Specific Plan), the City may require that a thorough analysis of the impacts of the proposed changes on the City's infrastructure system to be provided , and that mitigation be required as appropriate.
▪ Policy PF1D: Require that the provision of streets, sewer, electric, water, drainage, and other needed infrastructure be coordinated in a logical manner between adjacent developments so as to reduce design, construction and maintenance costs.
▪ Policy PF1E: Work towards requiring Require that infrastructure be designed and constructed to meet ultimate capacity needs, pursuant to a master plan, so as to avoid the need for expensive retrofitting to the extent feasible.
▪ Policy PF3D: Endeavor to impl ement Implement the California Building Code and any local ordinances to protect life, control fire losses and fire protection costs through the use of automatic suppression systems. Adequate water supplies to construct fire suppression infrastructure as necessary should be available.
▪ Policy PF4A : Adhere to the following thresholds for water services and facilities to the extent feasible:
o Program planned expansion activities, when demand at an existing treatment plant reaches within 10 percent plant capacity.
o Reservoir capacity should be maintained at 20 percent of maximum day demand.
Packet Pg. 1496
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
5.17-28 FEBRUARY 2024
o Develop additional water supplies from wells at least two years prior to a projected water deficit.
▪ Policy PF4B : Work to develop and maintain a regular program for systematically replacing deteriorated or deficient water pipes. Seek funding as appropriate. ▪ Policy PF4C: Consider requiring Require water distribution systems to be interconnected ("looped") wherever feasible to facilitate the reliable delivery of water anywhere in the City. ▪ Policy PF4D : Consider being actively involved in surface water adjudication which could have a negative impact on the City’s water rights and/or allocation. ▪ Policy PF4E: As reasonably necessary update the City’s Water Master Plan to reflect changes to the General Plan General Plan Diagram, water use pattern changes, supply, regulatory changes, or other circumstances.
▪ Policy PF4F: Strive to maintain Maintain, to the extent feasible adequate water supply during emergencies.
▪ Policy PF4G: Consider implementation of water conservation strategies and programs and provide incentives to developments that adopt efficiency measures for water use. Continue to require the use of water -efficient landscaping including drought -tolerant and native pl ants in all new development.
▪ Policy PF4H: Collaborate with appropriate agencies to provide education and outreach campaigns on the importance of water conservation where feasible. ▪ Policy PF14A: Through nexus studies determine the demand for new public facilities created by new development as compared to the demand for new facilities created by the community as a whole.
Based on the results, determine the "fair share" of the financial contributions that are appropriate for both the community at large and new development.
▪ Policy PF14B: Update as necessary the ordinance for Development Impact Fees that obligates new development to pay its "fair share" of the cost to build needed public facility improvements. ▪ Policy PF14C : Where appropriate, distribute the responsibility to pay for new public facilities between existing and future development based on their respective demands on the system. ▪ Policy PF14D: Strive to identify and pursue alternative funding sources that can be used for capital improvement project construction, staffing and ongoing maintenance of public improvements.
Expand the search for grant funding.
▪ Policy PF14E: As appropriate, request the preparation of a fiscal impact analysis for all specific plans or significant general plan land use amendments and annexations. The analysis will examine the fiscal impacts on the City and other service providers that result from large scale development. The fiscal analysis shall project a positive fiscal impact form new development or include mechanisms to fund projected fiscal deficits. Exceptions may be made when new development generates Packet Pg. 1497
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
PLACEWORKS 5.17-29
significant public benefits (e.g., low-income housing, primary-wage-earner employment) and when alternative sources of funding can be obtained to offset foregone revenues.
Public Safety Element
▪ Policy PS4H: Work with local community services districts (i.e. water districts) to ensure that district systems are developed, maintained, and monitored to provide minimum fire-flow, rates, and peak-load capacity for fire suppression.
▪ Policy PS4J: Utilize techniques, as determined appropriate by the Fire Marshal, to reduce fire damage in those areas with a high wildland fire potential.
IMPACT DISCUSSION
UTIL-3 Water supply and delivery systems are adequate to meet project requirements. [Thresholds U-4 and U-5]
Under the proposed project, existing land use classifications and configurations would remain unaffected.
As such, implementation of the proposed project would not require or result in the construction of new water treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities. As the City continues to grow, as describe d in Table 3-2 in Chapter 3, Project Description, the City would ensure that all new development is provided water services and all environmental impacts associated with the expansion or development of wastewater treatment facilities, if applicable, is evaluated. Planning and construction of new or expanded water facilities to accommodate new development is an on-going process for any area where future growth is anticipated.
As indicated in Table 5.178-1, Table 5.178-2, and Table 5.178-3, the City’s water supplies would exceed the demand under normal, single-dry, and multiple dry years from 2025 through 2045. Therefore, the City’s water supplies could accommodate the proposed project as no land use changes would occur . However, as noted above, Centerville CSD and BVWD, which serve portions of the Planning Area, are reliant on water supply from the Central Valley Project which has been experiencing chronic shortages due to the r ecent draught. BVWD noted in response to the NOP for the proposed project, that the District’s water was severely constrained and that any potential development within the District must consider a source of water other than the District’s CVP contract to be assured water . Centerville CSD serves a very limited portion of west Redding and did not indicate concerns with supplying water to new development within the City of Redding.
In correspondence with the City of Redding Public Work’s Department, it was noted that the Department currently meets its water supply, treatment and distribution demands for its service area. The department notes that surface water supplies are adequate for the proposed project’s planned horizon year . However, additional groundwater may be needed to increase water supply thus new groundwater wells and storage tank(s) are included in the Utility Master Plan. The department recommends continuing to conduct a Utility Master Plan update every 10 years to evaluate the distribution system and treatment facilities for future needs. In addition , the Department notes the importance o f designing a rate structure and impact fee Packet Pg. 1498
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
5.17-30 FEBRUARY 2024
program to ensure sufficient revenue for future projects as growth occurs (Appendix 5.15-1). With respect to future water service for those areas of the City that are within the BVWD, City staff indicates that agreement(s) are currently being negotiated that would allow the City to provide groundwater to the District to offset new development as conditions require. Adequate system interties are available for this purpose.
The proposed 2023-2045 General Plan Update includes policies from the Public Facilities and Services Element that require that all new development to construct or provide a fair share contribution toward the construction of any off -site improvements (Policies PF1A and PF1B); direct the City to program planned expansion activities, when demand at an existing treatment plant reaches within 10 percent plant capacity, maintain reservoir capacity at 20 percent of maximum day demand, and develop additional water supplies from wells at least two years prior to a projected water deficit (Policy PF4A); require the City to consider implementation of water conservation strategies and programs and provide incentives to developments that adopt efficiency measures for water use (Policy PF4G); and require the City to periodically update the City’s Water Master Plan to reflect changes to the General Plan General Plan Diagram, water use pattern changes, supply, regulatory changes, or other circumstances (Policy PF4E).
Moreover, if water system improvements are needed, additional project -specific environmental analysis would be completed pursuant to CEQA. Therefore, the proposed project would have a less than significant impact on water supplies and facilities.
Level of Significance Before Mitigation: UTIL-3 would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.
CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
UTIL-4 Implementation of the proposed project would not, in combination with past, present, and reasonably foreseeable projects, result in a cumulative impact with respect to water supply [Threshold UTIL-6].
Overall, cumulative water demands would neither exceed planned levels of supply nor require an expansion of the water distribution system beyond what is currently planned in the City’s 2020 UWMP . However, due to current shortages faced by BVWD and Centerville CSD, these districts may lack the capacity to meet future demand for development in the Planning Area that is in their service areas. Policies in the proposed General Plan such as the following will ensure that no development occurs unless and until wa ter is available.
Packet Pg. 1499
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
PLACEWORKS 5.17-31
CDD2C - Evaluate public-service impacts as part of environmental review for proposed development projects and require applicants to obtain "will -serve" letters from service providers prior to the approval of a discretionary permit or a building permit.
CDD2E - Maintain adequate capacity for urban growth and coordinate with service providers to ensure to the extent feasible that all public utility facilities and services required by development are available. The City shall undertake assessments of its fa cilities and services as necessary and may help facilitate the creation of assessment districts, where appropriate. Where public facilities are to be provided to development by a separate water or community services district, the City shall work to coordin ate planning activities with such agencies and obtain a “will -serve” letter, to ensure that the development in accordance with this General Plan can be accommodated.
Water from surface water is regulated to a specific “place of use” that is difficult to modify. Groundwater is available in the region in sufficient quantities to meet the cumulative demand for the proposed General Plan, except for new development in the Centerville CSD and BVWD service areas. Additional policies, such as Policy PF4A that requires advance water planning, will encourage collaboration between water providers and the City. Because policies in the General Plan require a will serve letter for w ater from the City, Centerville CSD or BVWD, before development can be approved, and since the City has documented adequate surface water and groundwater to meet the needs of development shown in this General Plan, cumulative impacts with respect to water supply under the proposed project would be less than significant and no mitigation measures are required.
Level of Significance Before Mitigation: UTIL-4 would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.
5.17.3 STORMWATER SYSTEMS
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Regulatory Framework
Federal Regulations
Clean Water Act
The Clean Water Act (CWA) establishes the basic structure for regulating discharges of pollutants into the waters of the United States and regulating quality standards for surface waters. The basis of the CWA was enacted in 1948 and was called the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, but the Act was significantly Packet Pg. 1500
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
5.17-32 FEBRUARY 2024
reorganized and expanded in 1972. “Clean Water Act” because the Act’s common name with amendments in 1972.
Under the CWA, the EPA has implemented pollution -control programs, such as setting wastewater standards for industry. EPA has also developed national water quality criteria recommendations for pollutants in surface waters.
The CWA made it unlawful to discharge any pollutants from a point source into navigable waters unless a permit was obtained.
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
The State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) regulates water quality in California to protect the environment and public health and to properly allocate water resources. One of the main ways that the CWA and SWRCB can ensure that stormwater will not con tain pollutants is through the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. The NPDES regulates stormwater discharges from three main sources: Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4), construction activities, and industrial activiti es.
All three sources require different NPDES permits to regulate and enforce mitigation measures within specific physical boundaries before stormwater is discharged to prevent harmful pollutants from running off into local, State, and Federal surface waters such as lakes, streams and rivers.
MS4 Permits
MS4 Permits are NPDES permits issued by the EPA, by way of the SWRCB, and authorize governmental entities to discharge stormwater collected by their storm sewer systems to waters of the United States.
Local Regulations
2000-2020 Redding General Plan
Public Facilities and Services Element
▪ Goal PF1 : Ensure that adequate public services and facilities are available to support development in an efficient and orderly manner .
o Policy PF1: Require that all new development, including major modifications to existing development, construct necessary on -site infrastructure to serve the project in accordance with City standards.
o Policy PF1B : Require that all new development, including major modifications to existing development, construct or provide a fair share contribution toward the construction of any off-site improvements necessary to offset project impacts and/or support the project.
Packet Pg. 1501
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
PLACEWORKS 5.17-33
o Policy PF1C: When reviewing applications for land use designation changes (i.e. zone change, General Plan Amendment, Specific Plan), conduct a thorough analysis of the impacts of the proposed changes on all aspects of the City's infrastructure system, and require mitigation as appropriate.
o Policy PF1D: Require that the provision of streets, sewer, electric, water, drainage, and other needed infrastructure be coordinated in a logical manner between adjacent developments so as to reduce design, construction and maintenance costs. o Policy PF1E: Require that infrastructure be designed and constructed to meet ultimate capacity needs, pursuant to a master plan, so as to avoid the need for costly retrofitting. o Policy PF1F: Utilize reimbursement agreements, where appropriate, when upgraded or oversized facilities are installed by an individual developer and the cost of the facilities exceeds the development's proportional share of responsibility. o Policy PF1G: Direct growth toward areas which already have infrastructure capacity available by providing incentives for quality infill development. o Policy PF1H: Encourage clustering of development to maximize the use and efficiency of infrastructure facilities.
o Policy PF1I: Regularly update and adopt the City's Capital Improvement Program (CIP) to prioritize funding for public works projects in accordance with the General Plan. o Policy PF1J: Recognize the considerable public investment made in existing utility and street infrastructure by ensuring that funding for maintaining its integrity, reliability, and service levels is on par with investment in new facilities. ▪ Goal PF9: Avoid increases in existing 100-Year Flood Levels. • Policy PF9A: Establish the following thresholds for stormwater drainage facilities: < Design drainage facilities to convey a 100-year storm.
o Until adequate regional stormwater facilities are in place, utilize a policy of "no net increase in runoff" for development projects in all drainage basins where existing development is within the 100-year floodplain.
o Policy PF9B : Select and pursue the acquisition of sites considered appropriate for regional stormwater detention/retention facilities within the incorporated area. o Policy PF9C : Construct regional stormwater detention/retention basins at locations that will minimize current flooding risk.
o Policy PF9D: Encourage Shasta County and the City of Shasta Lake to participate in the City's regional systems and/or develop a system of regional detention facilities that will complement the City’s system.
Packet Pg. 1502
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
5.17-34 FEBRUARY 2024
o Policy PF9E : Encourage project designs that minimize drainage concentrations and coverage by impermeable surfaces.
o Policy PF9F: Maintain all drainage facilities, including detention basins and both natural and manmade channels, to ensure that their full carrying capacity is not impaired.
Redding Municipal Code
Chapter 14.18, Storm Drainage Utility, states that the purpose of the storm drainage utility division is to:
1. Provide for the effective management and financing of a storm drainage system within the City;
2. Provide a mechanism for mitigating the damaging effects of uncontrolled and unplanned stormwater runoff;
3. Improve the public health, safety, and welfare by providing for the safe and efficient capture and conveyance of stormwater runoff and the correction of stormwater problems;
4. Authorize the establishment and implementation of a master plan for storm drainage, including design, coordination, construction, management, operation, maintenance, inspection, and enforcement;
5. Establish reasonable storm drainage service changes based upon each property’s contribution of stormwater runoff to the system and use and benefit of services and facilities; and
6. Encourage and facilitate urban water resources management techniques, including detention of stormwater runoff, minimization of the need to construct storm drains, and the enhancement of the environment.
The purpose of Chapter 14.19, Stormwater Quality Management and Discharge Control, is to protect and promote the health, safety, and general welfare of the City’s citizens by controlling non -stormwater discharges to the City’s stormwater conveyance system and by reducing pollutants in stormwater discharges to the maximum extent practicab le. Chapter 14.19 is also intended to assist in the protection and enhancement of water quality of watercourses and water bodies in a manner pursuant to and consistent with the Federal Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. §1251 et seq.) and Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act, and to provide the City with the legal authority to fully implement and enforce provisions set under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System General Permit No. CAS000004 for Stormwater Discharges from Small Municipal Storm Sewer Systems, Water Quality Order No. 2013-0001-DWQ.
City of Redding Stormwater Resource Plan
The Stormwater Resource Plan was developed for the City as a framework for ongoing identification and prioritization of stormwater and dry weather runoff capture projects that provide multiple benefits, including water quality, water supply, flood management, environmental, and community (Redding 2018).
Packet Pg. 1503
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
PLACEWORKS 5.17-35
Existing Conditions
The Storm Drain Utility is responsible for installing, monitoring, maintaining, and cleaning the storm drainage system of the City of Redding. The City of Redding storm drains are intended to collect and convey only uncontaminated storm water . Anything that is spilled, dumped, or deposited where it will be washing into the storm drain is prohibited (Redding 2022g ). Figure 5.17-3, Stormwater Pipes, shows the existing stormwater pipes in the City.
Packet Pg. 1504
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
5.17-36 FEBRUARY 2024
This page intentionally left blank.
Packet Pg. 1505
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding) Source: City of Reddding, 2022.
Figure 5.17-3
Stormwater Pipes
44 299
Stormwater Pipes
5.17 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
REDDING GENERAL PLAN UPDATE DRAFT EIR
CITY OF REDDING
PLA C EW O RK S
5 5
299
CALIFORNIA
UnincorporatedUnincorporated
Shasta CountyShasta County
UnincorporatedUnincorporated
Shasta CountyShasta County
Keswick
Reservoir
0 Scale (Miles)
1.5 City Boundaries
Packet Pg. 1506
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
5.17-38 FEBRUARY 2024
This page intentionally left blank.
Packet Pg. 1507
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
PLACEWORKS 5.17-39
THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
According to Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, a project would normally have a significant effect on the environment if the project:
UTIL-7 Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded stormwater facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects.
UTIL-8 In combination with past, present, and reasonably foreseeable projects, result in a cumulative impact with respect to stormwater facilities.
PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN POLICIES
The following goals and policies of the 2023-2045 General Plan Update are relevant to stormwater collection systems.
Community Design and Development Element
▪ Policy CDD5A: Consider the development of a stormwater detention master plan and development standards that would:
o Identify adequate locations for feasible regional and neighborhood detention and related facilities, which also may consider the use of parks and public right-of-way for stormwater detention.
o Ensure that public facilities and infrastructure are designed pursuant to approved State regulatory requirements.
o Establish design and construction standards, landscape, and maintenance guidelines. o Identify opportunities for recreation as a combined use with detention facilities. o Facilitate ground water recharge.
Environmental Justice Element
▪ Policy EJ5F : Increase citizen awareness and implementation of water and energy efficiency, weatherization, disaster risk reduction, climate change adaptation and mitigation, wildfire smoke protection, and safety from extreme heat through public engagement, incentives, and assistance with a special focus on underserved residents and areas with vulnerable populations. ▪ Policy EJ6A: Work proactively with residents as appropriate, so that existing and new public facilities, infrastructure, services are addressed in a manner that reflects the community’s needs and shifting priorities of future demands in an equitable manner, to the extent feasible.
Packet Pg. 1508
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
5.17-40 FEBRUARY 2024
▪ Policy EJ6B: Coordinate with water, sewer, waste management, electricity, police, and fire service providers to provide continuation of efficient and effective service, delivery, operations, and maintenance. Identify and prevent potential system vulnerabilities and coordinate with partnering agencies that provide public facilities to establish response teams or contingency plans in case of failure or emergency.
Public Facilities and Services Element
▪ Policy PF1A: Require all new development, including major modifications to existing development, construct necessary on -site infrastructure to serve the project in accordance with the City standards.
▪ Policy PF1B : Consider requiring Require all new development, including major modifications to existing development, to construct or provide a fair share contribution toward the construction of any off-site improvements necessary to offset project impacts and/or support the project ensuring that established service levels are maintained.
▪ Policy PF1C: When reviewing applications for land use designation changes (i.e. zone change, General Plan Amendment, Specific Plan), the City may require that a thorough analysis of the impacts of the proposed changes on all aspects of the City's infrastructure system, and require mitigation as appropriate.
▪ Policy PF1D: Require that the provision of streets, sewer, electric, water, drainage, and other needed infrastructure be coordinated in a logical manner between adjacent developments so as to reduce design, construction and maintenance costs.
▪ Policy PF1E: Work toward r equiring Require that infrastructure be designed and constructed to meet ultimate capacity needs, pursuant to a master plan, so as to avoid the need for expensive retrofitting to the extent feasible.
▪ Policy PF8A: Adhere to the following thresholds for stormwater drainage facilities to the extent feasible:
o Design drainage facilities to convey a 100-year storm. o Until adequate stormwater facilities are in place, utilize a policy of "no net increase in runoff" for development projects in all drainage basins. ▪ Policy PF8B: Work toward constructing stormwater detention/retention basins at strategic locations to minimize current flooding risk. Select and pursue the acquisition of sites considered appropriate for such facilities.
▪ Policy PF8C: Encourage Shasta County and the City of Shasta Lake to participate in the City's regional systems and/or develop a system of regional detention facilities that will complement the City’s system.
Packet Pg. 1509
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
PLACEWORKS 5.17-41
▪ Policy PF8D : Encourage project designs that minimize drainage concentrations and coverage by impermeable surfaces.
▪ Policy PF8E: As resources allow, maintain all drainage facilities, including detention basins and both natural and manmade channels, to ensure that their full carrying capacity is not impaired. ▪ Policy PF8F : Encourage the use of green infrastructure design and Low Impact Development techniques for stormwater facilities.
▪ Policy PF14A: Through nexus studies determine the demand for new public facilities created by new development as compared to the demand for new facilities created by the community as a whole.
Based on the results, determine the "fair share" of the financial contributions that are appropriate for both the community at large and new development.
▪ Policy PF14B: Update as necessary the ordinance for Development Impact Fees that obligates new development to pay its "fair share" of the cost to build needed public facility improvements. ▪ Policy PF14C : Where appropriate, distribute the responsibility to pay for new public facilities between existing and future development based on their respective demands on the system. ▪ Policy PF14D: StriveContinue to identify and pursue alternative funding sources that can be used for: capital improvement project construction, staffing and ongoing maintenance of public improvements. Expand the search for grant funding.
▪ Policy PF14E: As appropriate, request the preparation of a fiscal impact analysis for all specific plans or significant general plan land use amendments and annexations. The analysis will examine the fiscal impacts on the City and other service providers that result from large scale development. The fiscal analysis shall project a positive fisc al impact form new development or include mechanisms to fund projected fiscal deficits. Exceptions may be made when new development generates significant public benefits (e.g., low-income housing, primary-wage-earner employment) and when alternative sources of funding can be obtained to offset foregone revenues.
IMPACT DISCUSSION
UTIL-5 Existing and/or proposed storm drainage systems are adequate to serve the drainage requirements of the proposed project. [Threshold U-7] Under the proposed project, existing land use classifications and configurations would remain unaffected.
As such, implementation of the proposed project would not require or result in the construc tion of new storm drainage systems or expansion of existing systems. As the City continues to grow, as described in Table 3-3, in Chapter 3, Project Description, the City would ensure that all new development is within the capacity of the storm drainage system, and all environmental impacts associated with the exp ansion or development of storm drain systems, if applicable, is evaluated. Planning and construction of new or Packet Pg. 1510
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
5.17-42 FEBRUARY 2024
expanded storm drain systems to accommodate new development is an on -going process for any area where future growth is anticipated.
Compliance with Chapter 14.18, Storm Drainage Utility, and Chapter 14.19, Stormwater Quality Management and Discharge Control, of the Redding Municipal Code, would ensure that the City's storm drain system is adequate to capture stormwater and that the City's stormwater conveyance system would reduce pollutants in stormwater discharges. The City's Stormwater Resource Plan would provide ongoing identification and prioritization of stormwater capture projects which would ensure the City's storm drains are in adequate condition.
Additionally, the proposed General Plan Update includes the following policies from the Community Development and Design Element and Public Facilities and Services Element that would serve to minimize potential adverse impacts related to stormwater:
▪ Policy CDD5A: Consider the development of a stormwater detention master plan and development standards that would:
o Identify adequate locations for feasible regional and neighborhood detention and related facilities, which also may consider the use of parks and public right-of-way for stormwater detention.
o Ensure that public facilities and infrastructure are designed pursuant to approved State regulatory requirements.
o Establish design and construction standards, landscape, and maintenance guidelines. o Identify opportunities for recreation as a combined use with detention facilities. o Facilitate ground water recharge.
▪ Policy PF1B : Consider requiring Require all new development, including major modifications to existing development, to construct or provide a fair share contribution toward the construction of any off-site improvements necessary to offset project impacts and/or support the project ensuring that established service levels are maintained.
▪ Policy PF8A: Adhere to the following thresholds for stormwater drainage facilities to the extent feasible:
o Design drainage facilities to convey a 100-year storm. o Until adequate stormwater facilities are in place, utilize a policy of "no net increase in runoff" for development projects in all drainage basins. ▪ Policy PF8B: Work toward constructing stormwater detention/retention basins at strategic locations to minimize current flooding risk. Select and pursue the acquisition of sites considered appropriate for such facilities.
Packet Pg. 1511
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
PLACEWORKS 5.17-43
▪ Policy PF8C: Encourage Shasta County and the City of Shasta Lake to participate in the City's regional systems and/or develop a system of regional detention facilities that will complement the City’s system.
▪ Policy PF8D : Encourage project designs that minimize drainage concentrations and coverage by impermeable surfaces.
▪ Policy PF8E: As resources allow, maintain all drainage facilities, including detention basins and both natural and manmade channels, to ensure that their full carrying capacity is not impaired. ▪ Policy PF8F : Encourage the use of green infrastructure design and Low Impact Development techniques for stormwater facilities.
Moreover, if storm drain improvements are needed , additional project -specific environmental analysis would be completed pursuant to CEQA.
Therefore, the proposed project would have a less than significant impact on storm drain facilities.
Level of Significance Before Mitigation: UTIL-5 would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.
CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
UTIL-6 Implementation of the proposed project would not, in combination with past, present, and reasonably foreseeable projects, result in a cumulative impact with respect to stormwater facilities [Threshold UTIL- 8].
As discussed previously, development within the Planning Area would require conformance with State and local policies that would reduce hydrology and infrastructure construction impacts to less -than-significant levels. Any new development within the city would be subject on a project-by-project basis to independent project review as well as compliance with City policies and ordinances, design guidelines, zoning codes, and other applicable City requirements that reduce impacts related to hydrology and stormw ater drainage facilities. More specifically, potential changes related to stormwater flows, drainage, impervious surfaces, and flooding would be minimized by the implementation of stormwater control measures, retention, infiltration, and LID measures, and review by the City’s Public Works Department to integrate measures to reduce potential stormwater drainage and flooding impacts.
Packet Pg. 1512
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
5.17-44 FEBRUARY 2024
In combination with past, present, and reasonably foreseeable projects, proposed development and redevelopment within the EIR Study Area would not result in a cumulatively considerable impact to stormwater infrastructure and cumulative impacts would be less than significant and no mitigation.
Level of Significance Before Mitigation: UTIL-6 would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.
5.17.4 SOLID WASTE
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Regulatory Framework
Federal Regulations
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), an amendment to the Solid Waste Disposal Act of 1965, was enacted in 1976 to address the huge volumes of municipal and industrial solid waste generated nationwide. The RCRA gives the United States Environm ental Protection Agency (EPA) the authority to control hazardous waste from “cradle to grave.” This includes the generation, transportation, treatment, storage, and disposal of hazardous waste. The RCRA also sets forth a framework for the management of nonhazardous solid wastes.
The federal Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments are the 1984 amendments to the RCRA that focused on waste minimization and phasing out land disposal of hazardous waste as well as corrective action for releases. Some of the other mandates of this law inclu de increased enforcement authority for the EPA , more stringent hazardous waste management standards, and a comprehensive underground storage tank program. Amendments to the RCRA in 1986 enabled the EPA to address environmental problems that could result from underground tanks storing petroleum and other hazardous substances.
State Regulations
California Integrated Waste Management Act
The California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 (Public Resources Code Sections 42900 -42927) requires all California cities and counties to reduce the volume of waste deposited in landfills by 50 percent by the year 2000 and continue to remain at 50 percent or higher for each subsequent year . The purpose of this Act is to reduce, recycle, and reuse solid waste generated in the state to the maximum extent feasible.
Packet Pg. 1513
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
PLACEWORKS 5.17-45
The Act requires each California city and county to prepare, adopt, and submit to the California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle) a source reduction and recycling element (SRRE) that demonstrates how the jurisdiction will meet th e Act’s mandated diversion goals. Each jurisdiction’s SRRE must include specific components, as defined in Public Resources Code Sections 41003 and 41303. In addition, the SRRE must include a program for management of solid waste generated in the jurisdiction that is consistent with the following hierarchy: (1) source reduction, (2) recycling and composting, and (3) environmentally safe transportation and land disposal. Included in this hierarchy is the requirement to emphasize and maximize the use of all f easible source reduction, recycling, and composting options to reduce the amount of solid waste that must be disposed of by transformation and land disposal.
California Solid Waste Reuse and Recycling Access Act of 1991 This Act was passed by the State legislature and instructs the California Integrated Waste Management Board (now known as “CalRecycle”) to draft a “model ordinance” for the disposal of construction waste associated with development projects. This Act also requires local agencies to ensure that development projects have adequate areas for the collection and loading of recyclable materials.
Assembly Bill 341- Commercial Recycling Act
In 2011, AB 341 (Chapter 476, Statutes of 2011) was passed that sets a State policy goal of not less than 75 percent of solid waste that is generated to be source reduced, recycled, or composted by the year 2020.
CalRecycle was required to submit a report to the legislature by January 1, 2014, outlining the strategy that will be used to achieve this policy goal. This Bill affects local governments in that each jurisdiction is required to implement a commercial solid waste recycling program that consists of education, outreach, and monitoring of businesses. An annual report of the progress of such efforts is required by law. CalRecycle is responsible for reviewing each jurisdiction’s commercial recycling program.
Assembly Bill 1826- Mandatory Organics Recycling Act
Assembly Bill 1826 (AB 1826; California Public Resources Code Sections 42649.8 et seq.) requires recycling of organic matter by businesses, and multifamily residences of five or more units, generating such wastes in amounts over certain thresholds. Organic waste means food waste, green waste, landscape and pruning waste, nonhazardous wood waste, and food-soiled paper waste that is mixed in with food waste. Multifamily residences are not required to have a food waste diversion program. The City has implement ed SB 1826 except for the food waste portion. The City has performed outreach and education, however the process and solution is an ongoing effort. Recycling and organics service recovery services are available. Food waste will be added into the City’s processes as a recyclable organic Summer/Fall of 2023.
Senate Bill 1383- California’s Short-Lived Climate Pollutant Reduction Act California’s Short -Lived Climate Pollutant Reduction law, often called SB 1383, establishes methane reduction targets for California. SB 1383 regulations went into effect on January 1, 2022. The regulations Packet Pg. 1514
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
5.17-46 FEBRUARY 2024
aim to divert 50% of organic waste from landfills below 2014 levels by 2020 and 75% by 2025. CalRecycle is implementing the regulations and has established an additional target that not less than 20% of currently disposed edible food is recovered for human consumption by 2025. SB 1383 also requires that jurisdictions conduct education and outreach on organics recycling to all residents, businesses (including those that generate edible food that can be donated), haulers, solid waste facilities, local food ba nks, and other food recovery organizations. Redding is on track to be in full compliance of SB 1383 by spring of 2024.
CALGreen Building Code
The purpose of CALGreen is to improve public health, safety, and general welfare by enhancing the design and construction of buildings through the use of building concepts having a reduced negative impact or positive environmental impact and encouraging su stainable construction practices related to materials conservation and resource efficiency. The provisions of this Code apply to the planning, design, operation, construction, use, and occupancy of every newly constructed building or structure, unless othe rwise indicated in this Code, through the State of California.
Section 5.408, Construction Waste Reduction Disposal and Recycling, mandates that, in the absence of a more stringent local ordinance, a minimum of 50 percent of non -hazardous construction and demolition debris must be recycled or salvaged. CalGreen requires an applicant to have a Waste Management Plan, for onsite sorting or construction debris, which is submitted to the City for approval.
The Waste Management Plan does the following:
▪ Identifies the materials to be diverted from disposal by recycling, reuse on a project or salvage for future use or sale.
▪ Specifies if materials will be sorted on-site or mixed for transportation to a diversion facility. ▪ Identifies the diversion facilities where the material collected can be taken. ▪ Identifies construction methods employed to reduce the amount of waste generated. ▪ Specifies that the amount of materials diverted shall be calculated by weight or volume, but not by both.
Local Regulations
2000-2020 Redding General Plan
▪ Goal PF8: Provide for efficient collection and disposal of solid waste while maintaining an adequate waste disposal capacity.
o Policy PF8A: Establish the following thresholds for solid waste collection and disposal facilities:
Packet Pg. 1515
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
PLACEWORKS 5.17-47
▪ Pursue expansion of the City’s solid waste transfer station when collection activities approach 85 percent of facility capacity or additional space is needed to accommodate desired separation and recycling activities. o Policy PF8B : Continue to require solid waste collection service for residential, commercial and industrial uses within the incorporated area. o Policy PF8C: Continue to implement the City's Source Reduction and Recycling Element and expand identified programs, when feasible, in order to meet or exceed state mandated waste diversion goals.
o Policy PF8D: Promote recycling and other measures designed to reduce the generation of solid waste.
o Policy PF8E: Continue to work cooperatively with Shasta County to address regional issues related to solid waste disposal and waste reduction.
Redding Municipal Code
City of Redding ordinances governing storage, collection, and disposal of solid waste are set forth in Municipal Code Chapter 9.28, Solid Waste and Recycling. Requirements for enclosures for trash and recyclable materials are specified in Section 18.40.120, Trash Container Enclosures.
Existing Conditions
The City of Redding’s Solid Waste Utility has been servicing Redding households and businesses since 1944 offering residential and commercial collection services (Redding 2022h). The City of Redding’s Transfer Station and Material Recovery Facility (MRF) is located at 2255 Abernathy Lane in the City of Redding. The Redding Transfer Station and MRF has a maximum permitted throughput of 650 tons per day (CalRecycle 2019a).
All garbage is transferred to the West Central Landfill for disposal (Redding 2022h). The Solid Waste Utility operates the West Central Landfill on 14095 Clear Creek Road in Igo, California. West Central Landfill has an operational cease date of March 1, 2032, remaining capacity of 6,589,044 cubic yards, and a maximum daily throughput of 700 tons per day (CalRecycle 2019b).
THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
According to Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, a project would normally have a significant effect on the environment if the project:
UTIL-9 Generate solid waste in excess of state or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals.
Packet Pg. 1516
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
5.17-48 FEBRUARY 2024
UTIL-10 Comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste.
UTIL-11 In combination with past, present, and reasonably foreseeable projects, result in a cumulative impact with respect to solid waste facilities.
PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN POLICIES
The following policies of the 2023-2045 General Plan Update are relevant to solid waste collection.
Public Facilities and Services Element
▪ Policy PF1A : Require that all new development, including major modifications to existing development, construct necessary on -site infrastructure to serve the project in accordance with the City standards.
▪ Policy PF1B : Consider requiring Require all new development, including major modifications to existing development, to construct or provide a fair share contribution toward the construction of any off-site improvements necessary to offset project impacts and/or support the project ensuring that established service levels are maintained.
▪ Policy PF1C: When reviewing applications for land use designation changes (i.e. zone change, General Plan Amendment, Specific Plan), the City may require that a thorough analysis of the impacts of the proposed changes on the City’s infrastructure system be provided and that mitigation be required as appropriate.
▪ Policy PF1D: Require that the provision of streets, sewer, electric, water, drainage, and other needed infrastructure be coordinated in a logical manner between adjacent developments so as to reduce design, construction and maintenance costs.
▪ Policy PF1E: Work toward r equiringRequire that infrastructure be designed and constructed to meet ultimate capacity needs, pursuant to a master plan, so as to avoid the need for expensive retrofitting to the extent feasible.
▪ Policy PF7A: Adhere to the following thresholds for solid waste collection and disposal facilities to the extent feasible:
o Pursue expansion of the City’s solid waste transfer station when collection activities approach 85 percent of facility capacity or additional space is needed to accommodate desired separation and recycling activities.
▪ Policy PF7B : Continue to require solid waste collection service for residential, commercial and industrial uses within the incorporated area.
▪ Policy PF7C: Continue to implement the City's Source Reduction and Recycling Element and expand identified programs, when feasible, in order to meet or exceed state mandated waste diversion Packet Pg. 1517
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
PLACEWORKS 5.17-49
goals. Provide outreach and education to various customer bases to encourage participation in recycling and diversion programs.
▪ Policy PF7D: Strive to achieve zero waste to landfills through reuse, reduce and recycle strategies and/ or conversion technologies as appropriate. Collaborate with agencies to educate residents on the benefits of recycling and reducing solid waste.
▪ Policy PF7E: Continue to work cooperatively with Shasta County to address regional issues related to solid waste disposal and waste reduction.
▪ Policy PF7F : Strive to reduce the use of non -renewable, disposable, or toxic products in City operations.
▪ Policy PF7G: Collaborate with agencies to establish food recovery or donation services to reduce food waste in the City as appropriate. Explore recovery opportunities through composting or by disposition of organic waste at biofuel facilities.
▪ Policy PF7H : Work to develop and implement as funding allows, the use of organic waste for renewable energy generation through gasification, anaerobic digestion or similar methods.
IMPACT DISCUSSION
UTIL-7 Existing and/or proposed facilities would be able to accommodate project-generated solid waste. [Threshold U-9]
Solid waste generated under the proposed project would be disposed of at West Central Landfill. Under the proposed project, existing land use classifications and configurations would remain unaffected. Additionally, during construction, future development projects would comply with CALGreen requirements, specifically recycling and/or salvaging for reuse a minimum of 65 percent of nonhazardous construction and demolition waste generated during most “new construction” projects. Section 74 -04.006, Amendments t o CalGreen Building Standards Code, amends Section 5.408.1, Construction Waste Management, to include 2019 CalGreen requirements.
In correspondence with the City of Redding Public Work’s Department, it was noted that future development facilities by the proposed project would require additional facilities and infrastructure to meet service demands. The Department states that elements in the Facility Expansion Plan would need to be built to increase capacity ; the Materials Recovery Facility would need to be expanded to handle the increased volume and food waste processing equipment needed; and new truck parking and container storage on the West side of Abernathy would need to be built (Appendix 5.15-1).
The proposed Public Facilities and Services Element contains policies that require local planning and development decisions to consider impacts related solid waste and solid waste facilities. The following General Plan policies would serve to minimize potential adverse impacts related to solid waste:
Packet Pg. 1518
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
5.17-50 FEBRUARY 2024
▪ Policy PF1A : Require that all new development, including major modifications to existing development, construct necessary on -site infrastructure to serve the project in accordance with the City standards.
▪ Policy PF1B : Consider requiring Require all new development, including major modifications to existing development, to construct or provide a fair share contribution toward the construction of any off-site improvements necessary to offset project impacts and/or support the project ensuring that established service levels are maintained.
▪ Policy PF1C: When reviewing applications for land use designation changes (i.e. zone change, General Plan Amendment, Specific Plan), the City may require that a thorough analysis of the impacts of the proposed changes on the City's infrastructure system be provided and that mitigation be required as appropriate.
▪ Policy PF1D: Require that the provision of streets, sewer, electric, water, drainage, and other needed infrastructure be coordinated in a logical manner between adjacent developments so as to reduce design, construction and maintenance costs.
▪ Policy PF1E: Work toward r equiring Require that infrastructure be designed and constructed to meet ultimate capacity needs, pursuant to a master plan, so as to avoid the need for expensive retrofitting to the extent feasible.
▪ Policy PF7A: Adhere to the following thresholds for solid waste collection and disposal facilities to the extent feasible:
o Pursue expansion of the City’s solid waste transfer station when collection activities approach 85 percent of facility capacity or additional space is needed to accommodate desired separation and recycling activities.
▪ Policy PF7B : Continue to require solid waste collection service for residential, commercial and industrial uses within the incorporated area.
▪ Policy PF7C: Continue to implement the City's Source Reduction and Recycling Element and expand identified programs, when feasible, in order to meet or exceed state mandated waste diversion goals. Provide outreach and education to various customer bases to encourage participation in recycling and diversion programs.
▪ Policy PF7D: Strive to achieve zero waste to landfills through reuse, reduce and recycle strategies and/ or conversion technologies as appropriate. Collaborate with agencies to educate residents on the benefits of recycling and reducing solid waste.
▪ Policy PF7E: Continue to work cooperatively with Shasta County to address regional issues related to solid waste disposal and waste reduction.
▪ Policy PF7F : Strive to reduce the use of non -renewable, disposable, or toxic products in City operations.
Packet Pg. 1519
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
PLACEWORKS 5.17-51
▪ Policy PF7G: Collaborate with agencies to establish food recovery or donation services to reduce food waste in the City as appropriate. Explore recovery opportunities through composting or by disposition of organic waste at biofuel facilities.
▪ Policy PF7H : Work to develop and implement as funding allows, the use of organic waste for renewable energy generation through gasification, anaerobic digestion or similar methods.
All new development proposed under the proposed project, such as the addition or expansion of solid waste facilities, if needed, would be subject to subsequent project -level CEQA review. Construction activities would be required to comply with all federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
Level of Significance Before Mitigation: UTIL-7 would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.
UTIL-8 The proposed project would comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste. [Threshold UTIL-10] The proposed project would comply with the CALGreen Building Code Standards, which requires that at least 65 percent of nonhazardous construction and demolition waste from nonresidential construction operations be recycled and/or salvaged for reuse. Furthermore, the proposed project would also comply with the requirements of AB 341 that mandates recycling for commercial land uses. Additionally, any organic waste generated in amounts over a certain threshold would be recycled in accordance with AB 1826. In addition SB 1383 requires every jurisdiction to provide organic waste collection services to all residents and businesses. The regulations aims to divert 75 percent of organic waste from landfills below 2014 levels by 20205. Compliance with this statue would reduce organic waste.
Therefore, the proposed project would comply with all applicable federal, State, and local solid waste regulations and impacts would be less than significant.
Level of Significance Before Mitigation: UTIL-8 would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.
Packet Pg. 1520
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
5.17-52 FEBRUARY 2024
CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
UTIL-9 Implementation of the proposed project would not, in combination with past, present, and reasonably foreseeable projects, result in a cumulative impact with respect to solid waste facilities [Threshold UTIL- 11].
Growth within the Planning Area would contribute to an increase in the need for solid waste disposal service. As discussed above, the West Central Landfill currently has about a remaining capacity of 6,589,044 cubic yards. As a result, it can be concluded that there would be adequate capacity to support City increases in population and surrounding County population. In addition, the 2023-2045 General Plan includes several policies that prioritize zero-waste efforts and establish thresholds for waste collection and disposal facilities.
Given the long-term remaining capacity of the West Central Landfill and Redding Solid Waste Transfer facility and priority for waste generated in Redding, the 2023-2045 General Plan would have a less than significant cumulative impact on solid waste.
Level of Significance Before Mitigation: UTIL-9 would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.
Packet Pg. 1521
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
PLACEWORKS 5.17-53
5.17.5 REFERENCES
Bella Vista Water District (BVWD). 2021, June. Urban Water Management Plan 2020 Update. https://bvwd.org/documents/503/BVWD_2020_UWMP_Final_2021-06-17.pdf California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle). 2019a. SWIS Facility/Site Activity Details: City of Redding Transfer Station/MRF (45-AA-0059). https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/SiteActivity/Details/1059?siteID=3466 ______. 2019b. SWIS Facility/Site Activity Details: West Central Landfill (45-AA-0043). https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/SiteActivity/Details/1056?siteID=3463 Centerville Community Services District (CCSD). 2023a, May 7. “About Us”. https://www.centervillecsd.org/about-us
______. 2023b, March 28. “Centerville CSD now has 100% of its Water Supplies”. https://www.centervillecsd.org/news-detail?item_id=27580 Redding, City of. 2018, October . City of Redding Stormwater Resource Plan. https://www.cityofredding.org/home/showpublisheddocument/20300/636772637292500000 ______. 2021, November . City of Redding 2020 Urban Water Management Plan. https://www.cityofredding.org/home/showpublisheddocument/26706/637752447877530000 ______. 2022a, July 1. 2022 Municipal Utilities Fee Schedule. https://www.cityofredding.org/home/showpublisheddocument/11228/637920977903470000 ______. 2022b, July. City of Redding Wastewater Utility Master Plan. https://www.cityofredding.org/home/showpublisheddocument/28362 ______. 2022c (accessed). Clear Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant. https://www.cityofredding.org/departments/public-works/public-works-utilities/wastewater- utility/clear-creek-wwtp
______. 2022d (accessed). Stillwater Wastewater Treatment Plant. https://www.cityofredding.org/departments/public-works/public-works-utilities/wastewater- utility/stillwater-wwtp
______. 2022e (accessed). Wastewater Collection. https://www.cityofredding.org/departments/public- works/public-works-utilities/wastewater-utility/collections ______. 2022f (accessed). Our Water Supply. https://www.cityofredding.org/departments/public- works/public-works-utilities/water-utility/water-supply Packet Pg. 1522
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
5.17-54 FEBRUARY 2024
______. 2022g (accessed). Storm Drain Utility. https://www.cityofredding.org/departments/public- works/public-works-utilities/storm-drain-utility
______. 2022h (accessed). Solid Waste Utility. https://www.cityofredding.org/departments/solid-waste
Packet Pg. 1523
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
WILDFIRE
PLACEWORKS 5.18-1
5.18 WILDFIRE
This section of the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) evaluates the potential for implementation of the Redding General Plan Update to exacerbate wildfire risk or result in exposure of people or structures to significant wildfire risks in the city, its sphere of influence (SOI) , and proposed Planning Area . Cumulative impacts related to wildfire are based on regional wildfire hazards in the northern California region associated with proximity to wildlands and are based on Fire Hazard Severity Zones (FHSZ) mapped by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE).
5.18.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
REGULATORY FRAMEWORK
Federal Regulations
Healthy Forests Restoration Act
The Healthy Forests Restoration Act (US Code Title 16, Chapter 84, Section 6501) was approved on December 3, 2003, to reduce wildfire risk to communities, municipal water supplies, and at -risk federal lands expediting projects designed to reduce hazardous fuels. This act provides regulations for the protection of watersheds, forests, and rangelands, such as the land surrounding Redding, from catastrophic wildfires across the landscape (Federal Register 2001). Measures include improving systems to detect insect and disease infestations in hardwood forests; providing forestry assistance to state, private, and tribal landowners; facilitating research on large -scale treatments to reduce pest infestations; and entering into contracts with private landowners to manage their forests.
National Fire Protection Association Standards
National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) codes, standards, recommended practices, and guides are developed through a consensus standards development process approved by the American National Standards Institute. NFPA standards are recommended (advisory) guidelines in fire protection but are not laws or "codes" unless adopted or referenced as such by the California Fire Code or local fire agency. Specific standards applicable to wildland fire hazards include, but are not limited to:
▪ NFPA 1141, Fire Protection Infrastructure for Land Development in Wildlands ▪ NFPA 1142, Water Supplies for Suburban and Rural Fire Fighting ▪ NFPA 1143, Wildland Fire Management
▪ NFPA 1144, Reducing Structure Ignition Hazards from Wildland Fire ▪ NFPA 1710, Standard for the Organization and Deployment of Fire Suppression Operations, Emergency Medical Operations
Packet Pg. 1524
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
WILDFIRE
5.18-2 FEBRUARY 2024
State Regulations
California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection
The California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) is dedicated to the fire protection and stewardship of over 31 million acres of California’s wildlands. CAL FIRE provides fire assessment and firefighting services for lands within State Responsibility Areas ( SRAs), conducts educational and training programs, provides fire planning guidance and mapping, and reviews General Plan Safety Elements to ensure compliance with state fire safety requirements.
The Board of Forestry and Fire Protection is a government -appointed approval body within CAL FIRE. It is responsible for developing the general forest policy of the State, for determining the guidance policies of CAL FIRE, and for representing the State’s interest in federal forestland in California. The Board of Forestry and Fire Protection also promulgates regulations and approves General Plan Safety Elements that are adopted by local governments for compliance with State statutes.
The California Office of the State Fire Marshal supports the mission of CAL FIRE by focusing on fire prevention. These responsibilities include regulating buildings in which people live, congregate, or are confined; controlling substances and products which may, in and of themselves, or by their misuse, cause injuries, death, and destruction by fire; providing statewide direction for fire prevention within wildland areas; regulating hazardous liquid pipelines; developing and renewing regulations and buildin g standards; and providing training and education in fire protection methods and responsibilities. These are accomplished through major programs, including engineering, education, enforcement, and support from the Board of Forestry and Fire Protection. For jurisdictions within SRAs or Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones, the Land Use Planning Program division of the Office of State Fire Marshal reviews Safety Elements during the update process to ensure consistency with California Government Code, Section 65302(g)(3).
Together, the Board of Forestry and Fire Protection, Office of State Fire Marshal, and CAL FIRE protect and enhance the forest resources of all wildland areas of California that are not under federal jurisdiction. The CAL FIRE Land Use Planning Program and the Resource Protection Committee of the California Board of Forestry and Fire Protection reviewed the Redding Public Health and Safety Element. The Redding Fire Department has a mutual aid agreement with CAL FIRE during the wildland fire season for wildl and and structure fires within a one-mile fringe area surrounding the City.
Fire Hazard Severity Zones and Responsibility Areas
CAL FIRE designates Fire Hazard Severity Zones as authorized under California Government Code Sections 51175 et seq. CAL FIRE considers many factors when designating fire severity zones, including fire history, existing and potential vegetation fuel, flame length, blowing embers, terrain, and weather patterns for the area. CAL FIRE designates Fire Hazard Severity Zones within three types of areas depending on what level of government is financially responsible for fire protection:
Packet Pg. 1525
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
WILDFIRE
PLACEWORKS 5.18-3
▪ LRA – Local Responsibility Area: Incorporated communities are financially responsible for wildfire protection. There is one severity zone in the LRA, which is the Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone. ▪ SRA – State Responsibility Area: CAL FIRE and contracted counties are financially responsible for wildfire protection. There are three hazard zones in SRAs: moderate, high, and very high. ▪ FRA – Federal Responsibility Area: Federal agencies, such as the USFS, National Park Service, BLM, United States Department of Defense, United States Fish and Wildlife Service, and Department of the Interior are responsible for wildfire protection.
2018 Strategic Fire Plan for California
CAL FIRE produced the 2018 Strategic Fire Plan for California, which contains goals, objectives, and policies to prepare for and mitigate the effects of fire on California’s natural and built environments (CAL FIRE 2018).
The 2018 Strategic Fire Plan for California focuses on fire prevention and suppression activities to protect lives, property, and ecosystems, in addition to providing natural resource management to maintain state forests as a resilient carbon sink to meet California’s climate change goals. A key component of the 2018 Strategic Fire Plan for California is the collaboration between communities to ensure fire suppression and natural resource management is successful (CAL FIRE 2018). 2021 California’s Wildfire and Forest Resilience Action Plan The Governor’s Forest Management Task Force developed the California’s Wildfire and Forest Resilience Action Plan, which is a framework for establishing healthy and resilient forests that can withstand and adapt to wildfire, drought, and climate change. This plan accelerates efforts to restore the health and resilience of California’s forests, grasslands, and natural places; improves the fire safety of communities; and sustains the economic vitality of rural forested areas. CAL FIRE, in partnership with the USFS, intends to scale up forest thinning and prescribed fire, integrate climate adaptation into the statewide network of regional forest and community fire resilience plans, improve the electricity grid resilience, and promote sustainable land use.
State Responsibility Area and Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone Fire-Safe Regulations California Code of Regulations Title 14, Division 1.5, Chapter 7, Subchapter 2, SRA/VHFHSZ Fire Safe Regulations, establishes minimum wildfire protection standards for construction and development within the SRA and Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone. The se standards include basic emergency access and perimeter wildfire protection measures, signing and building numbering, private water supply resources for emergency fire use, and vegetation modification. These regulations apply to all residential, commercial, and industrial buildings within the SRA, the siting of new mobile homes, all tentative and parcel maps, and applications for building permits approved before 1991 where these standards were not proposed. Fire Safe Regulations also include a minimum setback of 30 feet for all buildings from property lines and/or the center of a road. Section 1273.08, Dead -End Roads, of these standards provide regulations for the maximum lengths of single-access roadways requiring the following:
Packet Pg. 1526
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
WILDFIRE
5.18-4 FEBRUARY 2024
▪ Parcels zoned for less than 1 acre: 800 feet
▪ Parcels zoned for 1 to 4.99 acres: 1,320 feet
▪ Parcels zoned for 5 to 19.99 acres: 2,640 feet
▪ Parcels zoned for 20 acres or larger: 5,280 feet
Fire Safe Regulations, Section 1299.03, Fire Hazard Reduction Around Buildings and Structure Requirements, provides defensible space requirements for areas within 30 feet of a structure (Zone 1) and between 30 and 100 feet from a structure (Zone 2). In Zone 1, all dead and dying plants are required to be removed and any flammable vegetation that could catch fire must be removed. In Zone 2, horizontal and vertical spacing among shrubs and trees must be created and maintained.
Public Resources Code Section 4291
Public Resources Code Section 4291, Mountainous, Forest -, Brush- and Grass-Covered Lands, is intended for any person who owns, leases, controls, operates, or maintains a building or structure in a mountainous area, forest-covered lands, shrub-covered lands, grass-covered lands, or land that is covered with flammable material, regardless of whether the property is within an SRA or Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone. This section requires defensible space to be maintained within 100 feet from each side of a structure. An ember- resistant zone is also required within 5 feet of a structure and more intense fuel reduction is required between 5 and 30 feet of a structure.
California Building Standards Code
The California Buildings Standards Code (California Code of Regulations Title 24) provides 12 different codes for construction and buildings in California. This code is updated every three years, with the most recent version effective as of January 1, 2023.
Building Design Standards
The California Building Code (CBC), Part 2 of 24 California Code of Regulations, identifies building design standards, including those for fire safety. It is effective statewide, but a local jurisdiction may adopt more restrictive standards based on local conditions under specific amendment rules prescribed by the State Building Standards Commission. Commercial and residential buildings are plan checked by local city and county building officials for compliance with the CBC and any applicable local edits. T ypical fire safety requirements of the CBC include the installation of sprinklers in buildings and other facilities; the establishment of fire -resistance standards for fire doors, building materials, and particular types of construction in high fire hazard severity zones; requirements for smoke -detection systems; exiting requirements; and the clearance of debris.
Packet Pg. 1527
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
WILDFIRE
PLACEWORKS 5.18-5
Materials and Methods for Exterior Wildfire Exposure
Chapter 7A of the CBC, Materials and Methods for Exterior Wildfire Exposure, prescribes building materials and construction methods for new buildings in a Fire Hazard Severity Zone or Wildland Interface Fire Area.
Chapter 7A contains requirements for roofing; attic ventilation; exterior walls; exterior windows and glazing; exterior doors; decking; protection of underfloor, appendages, and floor projections; and ancillary structures. Other requirements include vegetation management compliance, as prescribed in California Fire Code Section 4906 and Public Resources Code Section 4291.
California Fire Code
The California Fire Code is a series of building, property, and lifeline codes in the California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Chapter 9. The California Fire Code contains fire -safety-related building standards, such as construction standards, vehicular a nd emergency access, fire hydrants and fire flow, and sprinkler requirements. Specific chapters relevant to wildfire include Chapter 49, Requirements for Wildland-Urban Interface, and Chapter 7A of the California Building Code, Materials and Construction Methods for Exterior Wildfire Exposure.
Wildland-Urban Interface Areas
Chapter 49 of the California Fire Code, Requirements for Wildland Urban Interface Fire Areas, applies to any geographical area identified as a Fire Hazard Severity Zone by CAL FIRE. This section defines Fire Hazard Severity Zones and connects to the SRA Fi re Safe Regulation requirements for defensible space, as well as parallels requirements for wildfire protection, buildings construction, and hazardous vegetation fuel management in other sections of the California Code of Regulations and the Public Resources Code.
Fire Risk Reduction Community
A Fire Risk Reduction Community is a Board of Forestry and Fire Protection designation for local agencies in the SRA or Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone that meet the Board -defined best practices for local fire planning. The requirements for this designation are found in California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Division
1.5, Chapter 7, Subchapter 1, Article 3, Section 1268.01, Criteria for Local Agencies that are cities, city and county, or counties. Local agencies must meet the following requirements to obtain this designation:
▪ Adopt a local ordinance designating Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones and submit it to the Board. ▪ Submit the findings for all tentative and parcel maps approved for areas in SRA or Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone to the Board, as well as a list of subdivisions since January 1, 2013. ▪ The Safety Element of the General Plan has been submitted to the Board for review within the last eight years, and all recommendations have been adopted.
Packet Pg. 1528
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
WILDFIRE
5.18-6 FEBRUARY 2024
▪ After July 1, 2022, a progress report on implementation of the most recent fire safety recommendations from the Board upon subdivision review in a Fire Safety Survey for each community reviewed within the jurisdiction must be submitted.
The City of Redding has not received this designation.
California Public Utilities Commission
In 2007, wildfires in southern California were ignited by overhead utility power lines and aerial communication facilities near power lines. In response, the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) began considering and adopting regulations to protect the public from fire hazards posed by overhead power lines and nearby aerial communication facil ities. The CPUC published a fire threat map —under Rulemaking 15-05-006, following procedures in Decision 17 -01-009, revised by Decision 17 -06-024—that adopted a work plan for the development of a utility high fire -threat district where enhanced fire safety regulations in Decision 17 -12-024 apply (CPUC 2022a). The fire regulations require electrical utilities to (CPUC 2022b):
▪ Prioritize the correction of safety hazards.
▪ Correct nonimmediate fire risks in “Tier 2” (elevated fire threat) areas in the CPUC high fire-threat district within 12 months, and in “Tier 3” (extreme fire threat) areas within 6 months. ▪ Maintain increased clearances between vegetation and power lines in the high fire-threat district. ▪ Maintain stricter wire-to-wire clearances for new and reconstructed facilities in Tier 3 areas. ▪ Conduct annual inspections of overhead distribution facilities in rural areas of Tier 2 and Tier 3 areas.
▪ Prepare a fire prevention plan annually if overhead facilities exist in the high fire-threat district.
California Government Code
California Government Code Section 65302(g) and Section 65302.15 requires that safety elements be reviewed and revised as needed upon the revision of a Housing Element or Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP), but no less than every eight years, to ensure the goals, policies, actions, mapping, and background content are consistent with State regulations and reflect the best available information for wildfire risks, climate adaptation and resiliency, and emergency evacuation routes for certain residential area s.
Communities with LHMP updates occurring after January 1, 2022, must also ensure their Safety Elements or LHMPs include an assessment of evacuation routes and their capacity, safety, and viability and evacuation locations under a range of emergency scenarios.
For wildfire and evacuation purposes, a Safety Element must include the following:
▪ Identify wildfire hazards with the latest fire severity zone maps from the Board of Forestry and Fire Protection, US Geological Survey, and other sources.
Packet Pg. 1529
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
WILDFIRE
PLACEWORKS 5.18-7
▪ Consider guidance given by the Office of Planning and Research’s (OPR) Fire Hazard Planning document.
▪ Demonstrate that the jurisdiction or contract agency and associated codes satisfactorily address adequate water supply, egress requirements, vegetation management, street signage, land use policies, and other criteria to protect from wildfires. ▪ Establish in the Safety Element (and other elements that must be consistent with it) a set of comprehensive goals, policies, and feasible implementation measures for protection of the community from unreasonable risks of wildfire.
▪ Identify evacuation constraints of residential parcels in hazard-prone areas.
Governor’s Office of Planning and Research Fire Hazard Technical Advisory The OPR Fire Hazard Technical Advisory, first published in 2015 and updated in 2020, is a planning guide for addressing fire hazards, reducing risk, and increasing resilience across California’s diverse communities and landscapes. The guide provides a range of goals, policies, and programs for fire hazard prevention and mitigation, disaster preparedness, and emergency response and recovery. The 2020 update to the Technical Advisory includes specific land use strategies to reduce fire risk to buildings, infr astructure, and communities.
Regional Regulations
CAL FIRE’s Shasta Trinity Unit Strategic Plan
CAL FIRE prepares a California Strategic Plan to govern operations statewide. The California Strategic Plan is implemented through individual “unit plans” that are prepared for different regions for the state. CAL FIRE’s fire suppression operations are organized into 21 units that geographically follow county lines. CAL FIRE has adopted a Shasta Trinity Unit Fire Plan that covers both Shasta and Trinity Counties. The unit plan sets forth the agency’s priorities for the prevention, protection, and suppressio n of wildfires. The overall goal of the Shasta Trinity County Unit Fire Plan is to reduce total costs and losses from wildland fire in the unit by protecting assets at risk through focused pre -fire management prescriptions increasing initial attach success.
Shasta County Fire Safe Council
The Shasta County Fire Safe Council (SCFSC) was formed in May 2002 as part of a statewide effort to educate and encourage Californians to pro -actively prepare for wildfires. The mission of the SCFSC is to be a framework for coordination, communication, and support to decrease catastrophic wildfire throughout Shasta County. SCFSC’s adopted Community Wildfire Protection Plan is intended to reduce wildfire risk to communities, municipal water supplies, structures, and other at -risk land uses through a collabor ative process of planning and implementing programs with federal, state, tribal, and county partners. The Plan establishes a local definition and boundary for especially high risk areas where wildland vegetation and Packet Pg. 1530
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
WILDFIRE
5.18-8 FEBRUARY 2024
communities, rural homes, and critical infrastructure intermix and allows grant funding from state and federal agencies to be given to the projects and treatment areas identified in the Plan.
Shasta County Emergency Operations Plan
The Shasta County Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) was last updated in 2014 and is an all-hazard plan that describes how Shasta County will organize and respond to emergencies and disasters in the community.
The Shasta County EOP is based on the functions and principles of SEMS and identifies how the County fits into the overall SEMS structure. SEMS served as the model for the National Incident Management System and National Response Framework, and these systems are designed to be compatible through their use of the Incident Command System (Shasta County 2014) . Among other hazards, the Shasta County EOP describes regional emergency response to scenarios involving wildfires. 2017 Shasta County and City of Anderson Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan The Shasta County and City of Anderson LHMP identifies the City’s hazards, reviews and assesses past disaster occurrences, estimates the probability of future occurrences and sets goals to mitigate potential risks to reduce or eliminate long -term risk to p eople and property from natural and man -made hazards (Shasta County & City of Anderson 2017).
Shasta County Local Agency Formation Commission
Municipal Service reviews were added to the Local Agency Formation Commission’s (LAFCO) mandate with the passage of the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000. A service review is a comprehensive study designed to better inform LAFCO, local agencies, and the community about the provision of municipal services. Service reviews attempt to capture and analyze information about the governance structures and efficiencies of service providers and to identify opportunities for greater coordination and cooperation between providers.
Local Regulations
2000-2020 Redding General Plan
The existing General Plan contains the following goals and policies related to wildfire:
Community Design and Development Element
o Goal CDD7: Retain the natural appearance of the steep hillside areas and ridge lines. o Policy CDD7B : Establish hillside development standards to: (1) decrease allowable residential densities as the slope of a development site increases; (2) limit site grading on steep slopes; (3) appropriate, so buildings are set into and step down the hill; and (4) minimize disturbance of native trees and other vegetation outside the building, Packet Pg. 1531
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
WILDFIRE
PLACEWORKS 5.18-9
yard, and driveway areas, while providing appropriate levels of wildland fire protection.
Require revegetation of disturbed areas.
Public Facilities and Services Element
▪ Goal PF4: Ensure adequate fire protection and emergency medical response for residents and businesses in the community.
o Policy PF4A: Establish the following thresholds for fire protection services:
▪ Maintain a community ISO rating of 3 or better .
▪ Respond to 90 percent of all calls within 5 minutes of being dispatched. o Policy PF4B: Endeavor to maintain the minimum response time for fire calls through adequate staffing, proper distribution of fire stations and equipment, and use of automatic aid agreements.
o Policy PF4B: Construct new and possibly relocate existing fire stations as needed to maintain service thresholds.
o Policy PF4D : Utilize the following factors to determine the location and type of fire fighting equipment that is needed:
▪ The concentration of structures in a given area.
▪ The available water supply.
▪ The availability of automatic aid.
▪ The amount of area to be protected.
▪ The kind of fires to be encountered.
▪ Desired response times.
o Policy PF4E: Implement ordinances to protect life, control fire losses and fire protection costs through the use of automatic suppression systems. ▪ Goal PF4: Ensure adequate fire protection and emergency medical response for residents and businesses in the community.
o Policy PF3D: Implement the California Building Code and any local ordinances to protect life, control fire losses and fire protection costs through the use of automatic suppression systems. Adequate water supplies to construct fire suppression infrastructure as necessary should be available.
Health and Safety Element
▪ Goal HS4: Minimize the potential for loss of life, injury, and property damage resulting from urban and wildland fires.
o Policy HS4A: Maintain an Insurance Service Office (ISO) rating of 3 or better .
Packet Pg. 1532
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
WILDFIRE
5.18-10 FEBRUARY 2024
o Policy HS4B : Require that all new development and redevelopment meet state and local standards for fire protection; encourage the upgrade of existing structures to current standards.
o Policy HS4C : Work with local water districts to ensure that district systems are developed, maintained, and monitored to provide minimum fire-flow, rates, and peak- load capacity for fire suppression.
o Policy HS4D : Require remote hillside developments to maintain sufficient water supplies on-site, when appropriate, to provide wildland fire protection. Water supplies may be stored in the form of ponds, storage tanks, or other features acceptable to the Fire Marshal.
o Policy HS4E: Utilize appropriate techniques, such as those illustrated in Figure 4 -8, to reduce fire damage in those areas with a high wildland fire potential. The actual combination of these and/or other techniques required for a particular project will be determined by the Fire Marshal based on the level of hazard involved. o Policy HS4F : Construct emergency -vehicle access routes to open -space areas at optimal locations within developments.
o Policy HS4G: Develop a comprehensive vegetation management and weed-abatement program for open-space areas, including those that are located in existing subdivisions and in new development areas.
o Policy HS4H: Consider establishing a program to construct and maintain fire -access roads in ravine areas considered to have a very high fire danger to enhance the ability to suppress wildland fires. These roads need not be surfaced and may also function as part of the City’s trail system. Erosion and impacts to native vegetation and natural features shall be minimized.
o Policy HS4I : Amend subdivision regulations to ensure that cul -de-sac lengths are generally no greater than 600 feet and that sufficient emergency -vehicle turnaround areas are provided. Longer cul-de-sacs may be considered if fire-protection measures, such as resident ial fire sprinkler systems, are incorporated to ensure the safety of residents and emergency-response personnel.
o Policy HS4J : Generally require each residential development having 50 or more dwelling units and each commercial development employing 150 or more people to have at least two connected points of public access as may be determined necessary by the Fire Marshal.
o Policy HS4K: Maintain and augment mutual and automatic aid agreements with the California Department of Forestry & Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) and Shasta County. o Policy HS4L : Continue to promote fire prevention through education and public - awareness programs.
Packet Pg. 1533
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
WILDFIRE
PLACEWORKS 5.18-11
Natural Resources Element
▪ Goal NR8: Preserve areas containing excessive slopes or 100-year floodplains as open space to prevent loss of life and property damage and to provide valuable habitat and recreational opportunities.
o Policy NR8B: Strive to preserve land publicly dedicated as open space. Development in these areas, except as required to provide public facilities, such as roads, utilities, and trails, should be restricted to passive, low -impact uses that minimize the removal of existing vegetation and maintain or increase the existing habitat value, while providing adequate protection from wildland fires. Coordinate with other entities as appropriate to establish conservation easements that will ensure long term protec tion and necessary maintenance.
Buckeye-Redding Fire Protection District
The Buckeye-Redding Fire Protection District (BRFPD) is served under contract with the City of Redding Fire Department (RFD), providing vital fire and life safety service to residents, visitors, and businesses in the city.
The service area of the District covers 40,700 acres in the City of Redding and Buckeye area , and is staffed with eight fire stations. RFD operates through three divisions: the Administration Division which coordinates emergency preparedness activities, the Operations Division that is res ponsible for emergency response activities, and the Prevention Division which administers safety education, code enforcement, vegetation management, and inspection activities. RFD is also responsible for administering burn permits that allow residents with properties on the wildland-urban interface (WUI) to mitigate fuels. RFD encourages that WUI properties maintain 100 feet of defensible space around homes per Section 4291 of the Public Resources Code.
City of Redding Electric Utility Wildfire Mitigation Plan The City of Redding Electric Utility (REU) prepared a Wildfire Mitigation Plan (Plan) in 2021 to comply with changes made to the Public Utilities Code as part of Senate Bill 901 in 2018. The Plan describes the range of activities that REU is taking or considering, to mitigate the threat of power-line ignited wildfires, including its various programs, policies, and procedures. The Plan integrates a number of the policies outlined in the City of Redding Local Hazard Mitigation Plan and coordinates with City d epartments to implement its mitigation activities.
City of Redding Emergency Operations Plan
The EOP outlines the City’s all -hazard approach to emergency operations in order to protect the safety, health, and welfare of its citizens throughout all emergency management mission areas. Through the EOP , the City designates the Standardized Emergency Management System which is consistent with the National Incident Management System, and the Incident Command System (ICS) as the frameworks within which all emergency management activities will be conducted. The plan is intended to guide the City’s emergenc y operations while complementing and supporting the emergency response plans and procedures of Packet Pg. 1534
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
WILDFIRE
5.18-12 FEBRUARY 2024
responding agencies, other local governments, special districts, and other public, nonprofit/volunteer, and private-sector entities.
City of Redding Municipal Code
Chapter 9.12, Emergency Organization and Functions
The purpose of Chapter 9.12 of the Redding Municipal Code is to provide for the preparation and carrying out of plans for the protection of persons and property within this City in the event of an emergency; the direction of the emergency organization; and the coordination of the emergency functions of this City with all other public agencies, corporations, organizations, and affected private persons. As indicated in Section
9.12.050, Emergency Plan, the director of emergency services is responsible for the development of the City’s emergency plan, which shall provide the effective mobilization of all the resources of the City, both public and private, to meet any condition constituting a local emergency or state of emergency; and shall provide for the organization, powers and duties, and staff of the emergency organization.
Chapter 9.20, Fire Code
According to Chapter 9.20 of the Redding Municipal Code and Ordinance No. 2657 , the City adopted the 2022 California Fire Code as well as the 20 21 International Fire Code of the International Code Council (Redding 2022a). The State adopts a new California Fire Code every three years; currently, the 20 22 California Fire Code is the effective code implemented by the City. Amendments were are also made to the Code under Ordinance No. 2657 , including requirements for property addressing and signage, Class A roofing, automatic fire alarm and sprinkler system installation fire hydrants, eave protection, and fire flow and access.
Redding Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP)
Under the Federal Disaster Act of 2000, jurisdictions are required to prepare Local Hazard Mitigation Plans (LHMPs) that are subject to state review. The City of Redding LHMP assesses hazard vulnerabilities and identifies mitigation actions that the City will pursue in order to reduce the level of injury, property damage, and community disruption that might otherwise result from such events. The actions address hazards, as well as specific activities for, Wildland Fire, Flood, Hazardous Material, Severe Winter Weather, Earthquakes, Utility Disruption, Aviation Disaster, Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear, Explosives (CBRNE), Dam Overflow or Failure, and Volcanic issues. The most recent update to the City of Redding Local Hazard Mitigation Plan was adopted in 2023 (Redding 2023).
Packet Pg. 1535
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
WILDFIRE
PLACEWORKS 5.18-13
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Wildfire Background
The term “wildfire” refers to fires that usually result from the ignition of dry grass, brush, or timber .
Historically, wildfires commonly occurred in areas that are characterized by steep or heavily vegetated areas, which make suppression of the fire diff icult. More recently, wildfires have been encroaching into more urban areas within the wildland -urban interface (WUI), threatening homes, businesses, and essential infrastructure. While wildfires play an important role in the ecology of many natural habita ts, as urban development moves into areas susceptible to wildfire hazards, risks to human safety and property increase.
Types of Wildfires
There are three basic types of wildfires:
▪ Crown fires burn trees to their tops and are the most intense and dangerous wildland fires. ▪ Surface fires burn surface litter and duff and are known for being the easiest fires to extinguish and to cause the least damage. Brush and small trees enable surface fires to reach treetops, and so are referred to as “ladder fuels.”
▪ Underground fires occur underground in deep accumulations of dead vegetation. These fires move very slowly and can be difficult to extinguish due to limited access (Natural Resources Canada 2018).
Wildfires burn in many types of vegetation —forest, woodland, scrub, chaparral, and grassland. Many species of native California plants are adapted to fire. Chaparral shrubs and conifer forests recover from fire.
For example, many species of conifers have s eed cones that require fire to open in order for them to reproduce (CAL FIRE 1999). Between 2010 and 2017, wildfires in California burned about 265,000 acres of forest land; 207,000 acres of scrub vegetation; 99,000 acres of grassland; 18,000 acres of desert vegetation; and 14,000 acres of other vegetation types (CAL FIRE 2018). Wildfires have been observed to be more frequent and growing in intensity the past several years, with 2,569,386 acres and 363,939 acres burning in 2021 and 2022, respectively (CAL FIRE 2023a).
Wildfire Causes
Although the term “wildfire” suggests natural origins, a 2017 study that evaluated 1.5 million wildfires in the United States between 1992 and 2012 found that humans were responsible for igniting 84 percent of wildfires, accounting for 44 percent of acreage burned (Balch et al. 2017) . The three most common types of human-caused wildfires are debris burning (e.g., logging slash, farm fields, trash), arson, and equipment use ( Pacific Biodiversity Institute 2007) . Power lines can also ignite wildfires through downed lines, vegetation contact, conductors that collide, and equipment failures (Texas Wildfire Mitigation Project 2018).
Lightning is the most common cause of nature-induced wildfire (Balch et al. 2017).
Packet Pg. 1536
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
WILDFIRE
5.18-14 FEBRUARY 2024
An analysis of USFS wildfire data from 1986 to 1996 determined that 95 percent of human-caused wildfires and 90 percent of all wildfires were within 0.5 mile of a road, and that about 61 percent of all wildfires and 55 percent of human-caused wildfires occurred within approximately 650 feet (200 meters) of a road. The study concluded that the increase in human -caused ignition greatly outweighs the benefits of increased access for firefighters (Pacific Biodiversity Institute 2007).
There are three primary methods of wildfire spread:
▪ Embers. Embers are the most prolific cause of home ignition, at a rate of two out of every three homes destroyed. Embers are glowing or burning pieces of vegetation or construction debris that are lofted during a wildfire and can move up to a mile ahead of a wild fire, especially during high winds. These small embers or sparks may fall on the vegetation near a home (on dry leaves, needles, or twigs on the roof) and subsequently ignite the home. Embers can travel several miles during high wind events, placing a pote ntial risk to all structures without fire -resistant landscaping and construction within a mile of the fire (CAL FIRE 2019). ▪ Direct Flame Contact. Direct flame contact refers to the transfer of heat by direct flame exposure.
Direct contact will heat the building materials of the home, and if the time and intensity of exposure is severe enough, windows will break and materials will ignite. ▪ Radiant Heat. A house can catch fire from the heat that is transferred to it from nearby burning objects, even in the absence of direct flames or embers. By creating defensible space around homes, the risk from radiant heat is significantly reduced.
Secondary Effects of Wildfires
After a high-intensity wildfire, or crown fire, is suppressed, the burn scar is typically bare of its vegetative cover, which had supported the hillsides and steeper slopes. The intense heat from the fire can also cause a chemical reaction in the soil that makes it less porous, and the fire can destroy the root systems of shrubs and grasses that aid in stabilizing slope material. As a result, rainstorms increase the possibility of severe landslides and debris flows.
In addition to damaging natural environments, wildfires can injure and cause fatalities of residents and firefighters, in addition to damaging or destroying structures and personal property. Wildfires also deplete water reserves, down power lines, disrupt communication services, create poor air quality, and block evacuation routes, which can isolate communities. Wildfires can also ind irectly cause flooding if flood - control facilities become inadequate to handle increases in storm runoff, sediment, and debris that are likely to be generated from burn scars.
Redding Planning Area
Redding is situated at the point where the Central Valley meets the foothills of the Cascade mountain range, with an average elevation of approximately 500 feet across varying topography. The City’s municipal limits Packet Pg. 1537
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
WILDFIRE
PLACEWORKS 5.18-15
encompass approximately 61 square miles and contain approximately 40,287 housing units (DOF 2022). It is surrounded by mountains to the north, east, and west, and fertile agricultural lands to the south.
Extensive forests cover more than half of land area of Shasta County including the Shasta -Trinity National Forest which borders the City on its west and north sides. As a result, Redding’s sphere of influence (SOI) is composed of extensive open space areas that are susceptible to wildfire and encroachment i nto the community.
Redding typically experiences cool, wet winters and hot, dry summers creating extreme fire weather conditions especially from May through September . Daily temperatures during fire seasons (June-October) are usually above 90° Fahrenheit with a relative humi dity of less than 30 percent (Weather Spark 2023).
The Redding area consists of mixed conifer forests and interspersed brush vegetation (CPAW 2019). Outside of Redding, low to moderate load slash is common on private timber lands (CPAW 2019). Fuels are typically continuous throughout the area and can result in high fire danger especially during north wind events (REU 2021).
Wildfire is not considered a major threat for flat, urbanized areas of the City when adequate emergency resources are available. According to the Redding LHMP, the areas most at risk of wildfire damage are on the western edge of Redding with hilly terrain and limited emergency access. Figure 5.18-1, Wildland Urban Interface Area, shows the areas of the Planning Area that could be higher risk of wildfire hazard. The western edge of the City contains numerous subdivisions built on ridge tops surrounded by significant fuel build-up.
These conditions create increased risk due to a predominance of the north -facing slopes that are characteristically more vegetated than southern slopes. A vulnerability analysis conducted for the Redding LHMP determined that 13,437 residents in the City would be at risk from a fire scenario that was based on patterns of historical fires that have occurred in the City.
Redding also includes 23.5 square miles of land mapped by CAL FIRE as Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones (VHFHSZ). These areas cover almost 39 percent of the land area within the City’s boundaries and can be seen in Figure 5.18-2, Fire Hazard Severity Zones. VHFHSZ are areas of very high fire hazard severity zones within LRA’s and all development within these areas must adhere to Chapter 7A of the California Building Code. As seen in Figure 5.18-2, the City contains VHFHSZ land on its western, northern, and eastern edges.
Most of the land within Redding’s VHFHSZ areas is designated for residential uses as seen in Figure 5.18-3, Residential Uses in Fire Hazard Severity Zones.
California Public Utilities Commission Wildfire Hazard Zones In response to Fire Safety Rulemaking of the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC), the CPUC mapped high fire threat areas where more stringent inspection, maintenance, vegetation clearance, and wire clearance requirements would be implemented due to the elevated risk for a devastating wildfire and damage to electrical lines. The CPUC High Fire Threat District Map identifies three tiers of elevated risk for fires associated with utilities. As shown in Figure 5.18-4, CPUC Fire Threat Map , 20.4 square miles of land in the City’s limits are mapped in a Tier 2 Fire Threat District and 7.65 square miles of the City is mapped Packet Pg. 1538
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
WILDFIRE
5.18-16 FEBRUARY 2024
within a Tier 3 fire district. Tier 2 areas are defined as areas “where there is an elevated risk (including likelihood and potential impacts on people and property) from wildfires associated with overhead utility power lines. Tier 3 areas are defined as areas “where there is an extreme risk (including likelihood and potential impacts on people and property) from utility associated wildfires” (CPUC 2021). While the Redding Electric Utility is not regulated by CPUC, it incorporates the High Fire Threat Distr ict fire-safety regulations into its construction, inspection, maintenance, repair, and clearance practices, where applicable (REU 2021).
Packet Pg. 1539
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding) Wildland-Urban Interface Areas
Influence Zone
Interface
Intermix
Not WUI
REDDING GENERAL PLAN UPDATED DRAFT EIR
CITY OF REDDING
Source: Generated using ArcMap, 2023; City of Redding GIS 2022; California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, Fire and Resource Assessment Program (FRAP), 2021.
Figure 5.18-1
Wildland-Urban Interface Area Near Redding
PLACEWORKS
Redding SOI
Redding City Limit
5.18 WILDFIRE
0 Scale (Miles)
2 44
CALIFORNIA
273
CALIFORNIA
273
CALIFORNIA
299
CALIFORNIA
299
CALIFORNIA
5 5
299
CALIFORNIA
299
CALIFORNIA
273
CALIFORNIA
5 5
44 CALIFORNIA
Interface
Intermix
Not WUI
Infl uence
Zone
Infl uence
Zone
Infl uence
Zone
Infl uence
Zone
Infl uence
Zone
Infl uence
Zone
Interface
Intermix
Intermix
Intermix
Intermix
Intermix
Not WUI
Not WUI
Not WUI
Not WUI
Pine Grove AvePine Grove Ave
Shasta Dam BlvdShasta Dam Blvd
Lake BlvdLake Blvd
Bear Mountain RdBear Mountain Rd
Oasis RdOasis Rd
Keswick Dam RdKeswick Dam Rd
Quartz Hill RdQuartz Hill Rd
Placer StPlacer St
Buenaventura BlvdBuenaventura Blvd
Shasta Shasta Vista DrVista Dr
Victor AveVictor Ave
Hartnell AveHartnell Ave
Boyle RdBoyle Rd
Old Alturas RdOld Alturas Rd
Old Alturas RdOld Alturas Rd
Old Oregon TrlOld Oregon Trl
Old 44 RdOld 44 Rd
Alta Mesa DrAlta Mesa Dr
Airport RdAirport Rd
Chum Crk RdChum Crk Rd
Rancho RdRancho Rd
S Bonnyview RdS Bonnyview Rd
Meadow View DrMeadow View Dr
Dersch RdDersch Rd
Placer StPlacer St
Lower Springs RdLower Springs Rd
Branstetter LnBranstetter Ln
Texas Springs Texas Springs
RdRd
Clear Creek RdClear Creek Rd
Canyon RdCanyon Rd
Riverside AveRiverside Ave
Cypress AveCypress Ave
Oak StOak St
Packet Pg. 1540
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
CITY OF REDDING
REDDING GENERAL PLAN
0 0.5 10.25
Miles
Figure 5.9-1
Fire Hazards Zones within the City of Redding
Fire Hazard Severity Zones (LRA)
Responsibility Areas
1 - LRA
2 - SRA
3 - FRA
Fire Hazard Severity Zones (SRA)
Very High
Moderate
High
Source: GHD and Placeworks, 2022
REDDING GENERAL PLAN UPDATED DRAFT EIR
CITY OF REDDING
Source: Generated using ArcMap, 2023; City of Redding GIS 2017, 2021, and 2022; CAL FIRE, 2007.
Figure 5.18-2
Fire Hazard Severity Zones
0 Scale (Miles)
2 PLACEWORKS
Redding SOI
Redding City Limit
44 CALIFORNIA
273
CALIFORNIA
273
CALIFORNIA
299
CALIFORNIA
299
CALIFORNIA
5 5
299
CALIFORNIA
299
CALIFORNIA
273
CALIFORNIA
5 5
44 CALIFORNIA
5.18 WILDFIRE
Pine Grove AvePine Grove Ave
Shasta Dam BlvdShasta Dam Blvd
Lake BlvdLake Blvd
Bear Mountain RdBear Mountain Rd
Oasis RdOasis Rd
Keswick Dam RdKeswick Dam Rd
Quartz Hill RdQuartz Hill Rd
Placer StPlacer St
Buenaventura BlvdBuenaventura Blvd
Shasta Shasta Vista DrVista Dr
Victor AveVictor Ave
Hartnell AveHartnell Ave
Boyle RdBoyle Rd
Old Alturas RdOld Alturas Rd
Old Alturas RdOld Alturas Rd
Old Oregon TrlOld Oregon Trl
Old 44 RdOld 44 Rd
Alta Mesa DrAlta Mesa Dr
Airport RdAirport Rd
Chum Crk RdChum Crk Rd
Rancho RdRancho Rd
S Bonnyview RdS Bonnyview Rd
Meadow View DrMeadow View Dr
Dersch RdDersch Rd
Placer StPlacer St
Lower Springs RdLower Springs Rd
Branstetter LnBranstetter Ln
Texas Springs Texas Springs
RdRd
Clear Creek RdClear Creek Rd
Canyon RdCanyon Rd
Riverside AveRiverside Ave
Cypress AveCypress Ave
China Gulch DrChina Gulch Dr
Packet Pg. 1541
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
REDDING GENERAL PLAN UPDATED DRAFT EIR
CITY OF REDDING
Source: Generated using ArcGISPro, 2023; City of Redding GIS 2022; California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, Fire and Resource Assessment Program (FRAP), 2021.
Figure 5.18-3
Residential Uses in Fire Hazard Severity Zones
PLACEWORKS
0 Scale (Miles)
2 5.18 WILDFIRE
Packet Pg. 1542
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding) CPUC Fire Threat Levels
Tier 2
Tier 3
REDDING GENERAL PLAN UPDATED DRAFT EIR
CITY OF REDDING
Source: Generated using ArcMap, 2023; City of Redding GIS 2022; California Public Utilities Commission, 2021.
Figure 5.18-4
CPUC Fire Threat Map
PLACEWORKS
Redding SOI
Redding City Limit0
Scale (Miles)
2 44
CALIFORNIA
273
CALIFORNIA
273
CALIFORNIA
299
CALIFORNIA
299
CALIFORNIA
5 5
299
CALIFORNIA
299
CALIFORNIA
273
CALIFORNIA
5 5
44 CALIFORNIA
Tier 2
Tier 3
Tier 2
Tier 2
Tier 3
Tier 2
5.18 WILDFIRE
Tier 2
Tier 2
Pine Grove AvePine Grove Ave
Shasta Dam BlvdShasta Dam Blvd
Lake BlvdLake Blvd
Bear Mountain RdBear Mountain Rd
Oasis RdOasis Rd
Keswick Dam RdKeswick Dam Rd
Quartz Hill RdQuartz Hill Rd
Placer StPlacer St
Buenaventura BlvdBuenaventura Blvd
Shasta Shasta Vista DrVista Dr
Victor AveVictor Ave
Hartnell AveHartnell Ave
Boyle RdBoyle Rd
Old Alturas RdOld Alturas Rd
Old Alturas RdOld Alturas Rd
Old Oregon TrlOld Oregon Trl
Old 44 RdOld 44 Rd
Alta Mesa DrAlta Mesa Dr
Airport RdAirport Rd
Chum Crk RdChum Crk Rd
Rancho RdRancho Rd
Meadow View DrMeadow View Dr
Dersch RdDersch Rd
Placer StPlacer St
Lower Springs RdLower Springs Rd
Branstetter LnBranstetter Ln
Texas Springs Texas Springs
RdRd
Clear Creek RdClear Creek Rd
Can
yon Rd
Canyon Rd
Riverside AveRiverside Ave
Cypress AveCypress Ave
China Gulch DrChina Gulch Dr
Oak StOak St
S Bonnyview RdS Bonnyview Rd
Packet Pg. 1543
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
WILDFIRE
PLACEWORKS 5.18-21
Fire History
According to the Redding Fire Department’s Incident Statistics, the City saw a 12 percent increase in the number of incidents from 2016 to 2019 with the number of fire incidents peaking in 2018 at 515 fire incidents. Building and vegetation fires compose the majority of these fire incidents, with an average of 156 vegetation fires and 147 building fires reported across the four periods.
In addition to urban fires, Redding has experienced impacts from a number of wildfires in the county that exhibited extreme fire behavior due to an extended drought period, forest health, and climatic conditions.
One of the most destructive fires to impact Redding in recent years was the Carr Fire. The Carr Fire started on July 23, 2018, in Whiskeytown National Park and grew to 229,651 acres, resulting in the evacuation of more than 36,000 people, with seven confirmed fire personnel and civilian fatalities attributed to the fire and the destruction of 1,614 structures (CAL FIRE 2023b). A total of 270 homes in Redding were destroyed as a result of the Carr Fire (Chandler 2019). In September of 2021, the Fawn Fire burned over 8,500 acres north of Redding and forced the evacuation of more than 4,000 residents of the area (Arthur & Chapman 2021).
Shasta County also has three fires listed on CAL FIRE’s 20 most damaging incidents: the Carr Fire, the 1992 Fountain Fire which burned 63,960 acres and destroyed 636 structures, and the 1999 Jones Fire which burned 26,200 acres and destroyed 954 structures (CAL FIRE 2022). A total of 83 wildfires have occurred in Shasta County from 2013 through 2022, burning a total of 1,614,015 acres, according to CAL FIRE’s wildfire incident archives. Table 5.18-1, Recent Wildfire History near Redding and its SOI , below summarizes the most severe fire incidents that have occurred in or near Redding the last 9 years. Figure 5.18 -5, Fire Perimeters Through 2021 Near Redding, shows the locations all wildfires, prescribed burns, and other fuel modification projects within vicinity of Redding.
Packet Pg. 1544
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
WILDFIRE
5.18-22 FEBRUARY 2024
This page intentionally left blank.
Packet Pg. 1545
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding) Fire Name
AIRPORT FIRE
ANDERSON DUMP
CANYON #4
CARR
CHINA
CLEAR
CLEAR CREEK RD
CLOVERDALE #2
CREEK
DALE
DEMOCRATE
FAWN
G. CHATHAM
GRANT SCHOOL
HIDING
HONEYBEE
HORSE
IRON
JONES
KESWICK
LAKE
LAVERNE
LITTLE
LOOMIS CORNERS
LOWER SPRINGS
LOWER SPRINGS RD.
MINE
MOTION
MOUNTAIN
MULETOWN
NETTLETON #3
P ANTHER
PRIGMORE ESCAPE
S.P .R.R. #14
SUGAR LOAF MINE
SWASEY
SWASEY DR
TIERRA
UNION
REDDING GENERAL PLAN UPDATED DRAFT EIR
CITY OF REDDING
Source: Generated using ArcMap, 2023; City of Redding GIS 2022; California Public Utilities Commission, 2021.
Figure 5.18-5
Fire Perimeters Through 2021 Near Redding
PLACEWORKS
Redding SOI
Redding City Limit0
Scale (Miles)
2 44
CALIFORNIA
273
CALIFORNIA
273
CALIFORNIA
299
CALIFORNIA
299
CALIFORNIA
5 5
299
CALIFORNIA
299
CALIFORNIA
5 5
44 CALIFORNIA
Not WUI
Nt WUI
Not WUI
Not WUI
5.18 WILDFIRE
Pine Grove AvePine Grove Ave
Shasta Dam BlvdShasta Dam Blvd
Lake BlvdLake Blvd
Bear Mountain RdBear Mountain Rd
Oasis RdOasis Rd
Keswick Dam RdKeswick Dam Rd
Quartz Hill RdQuartz Hill Rd
Placer StPlacer St
Buenaventura BlvdBuenaventura Blvd
Shasta Shasta Vista DrVista Dr
Victor AveVictor Ave
Hartnell AveHartnell Ave
Boyle RdBoyle Rd
Old Alturas RdOld Alturas Rd
Old Alturas RdOld Alturas Rd
Old Oregon TrlOld Oregon Trl
Old 44 RdOld 44 Rd
Alta Mesa DrAlta Mesa Dr
Airport RdAirport Rd
Chum Crk RdChum Crk Rd
Rancho RdRancho Rd
Meadow View DrMeadow View Dr
Dersch RdDersch Rd
Placer StPlacer St
Lower Springs RdLower Springs Rd
Branstetter LnBranstetter Ln
Texas Springs Texas Springs
RdRd
Clear Creek RdClear Creek Rd
Can
yon Rd
Canyon Rd
Riverside AveRiverside Ave
Cypress AveCypress Ave
China Gulch DrChina Gulch Dr
S Bonnyview RdS Bonnyview Rd
Packet Pg. 1546
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
WILDFIRE
5.18-24 FEBRUARY 2024
This page intentionally left blank.
Packet Pg. 1547
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
WILDFIRE
PLACEWORKS 5.18-25
TABLE 5.18-1 RECENT WILDFIRE HISTORY NEAR REDDING AND ITS SOI Year Fire Incident Location Acres
Burned Damages/Losses
2013 Clover Fire Community of Igo, 10 miles southwest of Redding 8,073 10 structures damaged, 201
structures destroyed, 6 injuries
2014 Gulch Fire Backbone Ridge, 15 miles northeast of
Redding 1,375 4 structures destroyed, 4 injuries
2017 Laverne Fire 6 miles southeast of Redding 180 5 structures destroyed 2018 Masonic Fire Lake Blvd & Masonic Ave, Redding 38 1 Structure destroyed, 1 injury 2018 Creek Fire Clear Creek Rd & American Rd, west of
Redding 1,678 11 structures destroyed, 1 injury
2018 Carr Fire Hwy 299 and Carr Powerhouse Rd,
Whiskeytown 299,651 61 structures damaged, 1,614
structures destroyed, 3 fatalities
2019 Mountain Fire Bear Mountain Road and Dry Creek Road, north of Bella Vista 600 7 structures damaged, 14 structures destroyed, 3 injuries
2020 Zogg Fire Zogg Mine Road and Jenny Bird Lane,
North of Igo 56,338 27 structures damaged, 204
structures destroyed, 1 injury
2021 Fawn Fire Fawndale Rd and Radcliff Rd, 5 miles
northeast of Shasta Lake 8,578 26 structures damaged, 185 structures destroyed, 4 injuries
2021 Rock Fire Benson Dr and Rock Creek Rd, East of
Whiskeytown 108 Unknown
2022 Flanagan Fire Flanagan Road and N Beltline Road, west of Shasta Lake City 88 No losses
2022 Branstetter Fire Branstetter Lane and Cedars Road, City of Redding 34 No losses
2022 Peter Fire Peter Pan Gulch Road and Olinda Road 304 6 structures damaged, 16 structures destroyed
Source: CAL FIRE 2022
Weed Abatement
As Redding is surrounded by forestlands, maintaining existing fire breaks and clearing vegetation helps to prevent wildland fires from entering the community. Under a Cooperative Agreement with the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR), CAL FIRE operates the Sugar Pine Conservation Camp and provides weed abatement in Redding and the surrounding wildland areas in Shasta County (CDCR 2022).
Mutual Aid Agreements
The City of Redding actively participates in a range of mutual automatic aid agreements with Shasta County Fire and CAL FIRE designed to improve its capability to respond to fire -related emergencies, and fire protection and suppression. The City of Redding’s Fire Department provides services through an agreement Packet Pg. 1548
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
WILDFIRE
5.18-26 FEBRUARY 2024
with the Buckeye Fire Protection District. The Redding Fire Department does not receive service from the Buckeye Fire Protection District but receive payment from them for their service. The Redding Fire Department also falls under the state mutual aid system and provide services when requested through California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES).
Fire Protection Services
See Section 5.15, Public Services and Recreation, for information on fire protection resources. The Redding Fire Department is an “all risk” department, responding to fires, medical emergencies, and hazardous conditions within the city. The RFD also participates in mutual and contractual aid with neighboring jurisdictions. There are eight RFD fire stations, as described in Chapter 5.15, Public Services. Within the unincorporated areas of the Redding Planning Area , Shasta County Fire Department or other local jurisdictional fire units respond to service calls. See Figure 5.15-1, Fire Stations in the Vicinity of Redding, in Section 5.15, Public Services, for the locations of fire stations within the city.
Evacuation Routes
Redding’s location makes it susceptible to wildfires and floods. Most major roadways within the city and SOI are crossed by one or more disaster prone areas –including VHFSZs and 100 -year flood zones. These disasters can cause significant damage to transpor tation infrastructure, preventing or impeding access by emergency responders and evacuation by residents. Regional access is limited to the I -5 running north - south through the City and SR-44 which provides access from the east into the City and merges into SR 299 which runs northeast to west through the City. Large portions of these routes outside of the urbanized areas of the City are surrounded by high fire hazard areas which increases risk for safe evacuation during emergency events.
Redding works with the Shasta Area Safety Communications Agency to manage emergency communications for the city, including the use of the CodeRED emergency notification system. CodeRed sends phone alerts during community-wide emergencies and can be used to coordinate evacuation activities (SHASCOM 2022).
The City also uses a digital wildfire information map that collects synchronous data from the Integrated Reporting of Wildland-Fire Information service, the National Interagency Fire Center, Cal OES and CALTRANS to disseminate wil dfire status updates and evacuation information (Redding 2022 b). This tool allows residents to find their evacuation zone, check their evacuation zone status and get directions for evacuation routes.
CAL EOE and the County also maintains an Emergency Operations Center to help coordinate information and resources for any type of disaster or threat. Yearly ongoing training, updating of critical information, and drills are conducted to help protect people and property (Redding 2015). As part of REU’s wildfire mitigation strategies, the City established an Emergency Operations Command Center to address the needs of the City.
Packet Pg. 1549
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
WILDFIRE
PLACEWORKS 5.18-27
5.18.2 THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
According to Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, a project would normally have a significant effect on the environment if located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones the project would:
WILD-1 Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan.
WILD-2 Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire.
WILD-3 Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment.
WILD-4 Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes.
WILD-5 In combination with past, present, and reasonably foreseeable projects, result in cumulative impacts with respect to wildfire.
5.18.3 PROPOSED GENERAL POLICIES
Community Development and Design Element
o Policy CDD6B: Consider establishing hillside development standards to:
o Decrease allowable residential densities with an increase in site slope. o Limit excessive grading on slopes.
o Encourage the use of multiple levels where appropriate, so buildings are set into and stepped down the hill.
o Minimize deforestation and disturbance of native vegetation outside the approved building footprint and street and utility corridors, while considering the Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP) for wildland fire protection.
o Policy CDD16F: Consider establishing a comprehensive landscape and vegetation management program that incorporates the City’s urban landscape and open space lands to enhance the landscape aesthetic of the City and more effectively protects the community from wildfire hazards.
The program could be responsible for the following and additional activities as may be appropriate:
o Overseeing the City’s street tree program, including recommendations on appropriate trees and long-term maintenance.
Packet Pg. 1550
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
WILDFIRE
5.18-28 FEBRUARY 2024
o Reviewing and approval of landscape plans developed in conjunction with private development activities such as commercial and office developments, residential planned developments, proposed landscape maintenance districts, stormwater detention basins, and similar developments and facilities.
o Review and consider, in concert with appropriate public safety agencies, vegetation modifications and long -term management plans in Redding’s wildland -urban interface areas to protect new and existing developments from wildfire. o Identifying and seeking local, State, and federal funds as well as grants and other financial resources to accomplish the above activities.
▪ Policy CDD18A: Place new electric distribution lines underground in new development where feasible appropriate.
▪ Policy CDD18B: Place existing overhead distribution lines underground upon development of the abutting property where feasible appropriate.
▪ Policy CDD18C: Consider establishing a mechanism to systematically replace underground distribution lines in existing neighborhoods and commercial areas as funding sources are identified.
Environmental Justice Element
▪ Policy EJ3C: Partner with local, regional, and federal agencies to seek grants and other opportunities towards development and expansion of clean air centers, building ventilation upgrades, and other available and accessible technological advancements to provide better air quality and to reduce negative health impacts during wildfires and extreme weather events. ▪ Policy EJ7E: As funding and resources permit, implement an emergency evacuation plan and consistently educate residents on:
o Access: Evacuation routes laid out for residents to use in case of emergency. o Signage: Signage, wayfinding, and designated evacuation routes. o Communication: Timely notices that may arrive in a variety of languages to accommodate the linguistic preferences of all residents and through multiple communication avenues including Assistive Listening Devices.
o Assistance: Available assistance programs to aid resident evacuation during emergency.
Parks, Trails, and Recreation Element
▪ Policy R2D: Protect and enhanc e access for public safety, fire and rescue activities to the entire riverfront and creek corridors while minimizing and mitigating impacts to the extent feasible. ▪ Policy R13G: Provide buffer zones to act as staging and access points for wildfire protection activities where appropriate.
Packet Pg. 1551
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
WILDFIRE
PLACEWORKS 5.18-29
Public Safety Element
▪ Policy PS4A: Strive to maintain an Insurance Service Office (ISO) rating of 3 or better . ▪ Policy PS4B: All Design new development and redevelopment projects should be designed to meet state and local standards for fire protection; encourage the upgrade of existing structures to current standards. Encourage the installation of smoke detectors in residential and commercial facilities constructed prior to the requirement of their installation, as appropriate. ▪ Policy PS4C: As resources allow, enforce existing Apply appropriate codes and standards, to ensure all new and existing developments provide:
o Defensible space.
o Non-combustible design with appropriate building exterior and roofing materials. o Spark arresting system, Fire alarms, and fire sprinkler systems are installed ▪ Policy PS4D: Continue to include the Fire Department in development review to ensure projects adequately address safety, on -site fire protection, and comply with applicable fire and building codes.
▪ Policy PS4E: ConsiderPrioritize developing and funding a comprehensive vegetation management and weed-abatement program, beyond the wildfire mitigation through the Electric Utility, for City- owned properties, open-space areas, including those that are located in existing subdivisions and in new developments to prevent and reduce the risk of fire. ▪ Policy PS4G: Consider establishing Develop a program to construct and maintain fire-access roads in ravine areas considered to have a very high fire danger to enhance the ability to suppress wildland fires. These roads need not be surfaced and may also function as part of the City’s trail system. Erosion and impacts to native vegetation and natural features shall be minimized. ▪ Policy PS4H: Work with local community services districts (i.e.water districts) to ensure that district systems are developed, maintained, and monitored to provide minimum fire-flow, rates, and peak- load capacity for fire suppression.
▪ Policy PS4I: Require that remote hillside developments maintain sufficient water supplies on -site, when appropriate, to provide wildland fire protection. Water supplies may be stored in the form of ponds, storage tanks, or other features acceptable to the Fire Marshal. ▪ Policy PS4J: Utilize techniques, as determined appropriate by the Fire Marshal, to reduce fire damage in those areas with a high wildland fire potential. ▪ Policy PS4K: Enforce subdivision regulations that generally limit cul -de-sac lengths to no greater than 600 feet and strive to ensure that sufficient emergency-vehicle turnaround areas are provided. ▪ Policy PS4L: Apply as appropriate, subdivision regulations requiring each residential development having 50 or more dwelling units and each commercial development employing 150 or more people Packet Pg. 1552
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
WILDFIRE
5.18-30 FEBRUARY 2024
to have at least two connected points of public access as may be determined necessary by the Fire Marshal.
▪ Policy PS4M: Seek to construct Construct emergency-vehicle access routes to open-space areas at optimal locations within projects during the development process, as funding or law allows. As funding and physical conditions allow, construct such access routes in existing developments where warranted.
▪ Policy PS4N: Strive to ensure Ensure new subdivisions have adequate fire protection measures such as multi -access for firefighting apparatus, noncombustible building construction, appropriate defensible space, street widths and grade to accommodate emergency vehicles and evacuees simultaneously.
▪ Policy PS4O: Strive to maintain and augment mutual and automatic aid agreements with the California Department of Forestry & Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) and Shasta County. Support local fire protection agencies with efforts to seek funding for development and implementation of a continuous vegetation management program in fire hazard severity zones and WUI regions. ▪ Policy PS4P: Continue to promote fire prevention through education and public -awareness programs in partnership with local, State and Federal agencies, as resources permit. Update the fire hazard severity zone mapping as new data becomes available and ensure availability and accessibility of these maps to the community.
▪ Policy PS4Q: Work toward educating the residents on the importance of fire safety, prevention, and emergency preparedness including vegetation management, decreasing fuel loads, hardening homes and structures, maintaining defensible space, and public safety notifications , to the extent feasible.
▪ Policy PS11A: Strive to ensure that emergency personnel receive adequate training in traffic-control and evacuation procedures as required by the City's Emergency Operations Plan. ▪ Policy PS11B: Evacuation routes contained within the City's Emergency Operations Plan should be published and reinforced in public materials as a general guide for improving the awareness and preparedness of residents located in high-hazard areas, as appropriate. ▪ Policy PS11C: Consider implementing an emergency evacuation plan and consistently educate residents on:
o Access: Evacuation routes laid out for residents to use in case of emergency. o Signage: Signage, wayfinding, and designated evacuation routes. o Communication: Timely notices that may arrive through multiple communication avenues. o Assistance: Available assistance programs to aid resident evacuation during emergency.
Packet Pg. 1553
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
WILDFIRE
PLACEWORKS 5.18-31
5.18.4 IMPACT DISCUSSION
WILD-1 Development under the 2023-2045 General Plan Update could substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. [Threshold WILD-1].
The City of Redding has prepared an EOP to ensure the most effective allocation of resources during times of emergency for the maximum benefit and protection of the population. Additionally, the City’s LHMP and REU’s Wildfire Mitigation Plan provide strategies and mitigation measures to address local fire hazards.
Furthermore, the County’s Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP) assists the community to define the level of risk, assess vulnerability, provide guidance for reducing risks, manage vegetation fuels, increase preparedness, formulate pre-fire response and evacuation plans, and increase community resiliency to allow residents and businesses to return living conditions to normal as quickly as possible (Western Shasta RCD 2016). Additional resources from the County, including the Shasta-Trinity Strategic Fire Plan, the Shasta County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan, and the Shasta County EOP address the fire hazard responses and mitigation strategies for forestlands surrounding the Redding urban area. The City is actively developing its CWPP and intends to include appropriate provisions in the Zoning Ordinance which is anticipated to be completed in 2024.
The 2023-2045 General Plan Update has proposed a reduced Planning Area boundary that largely matches the City’s 2014 designated SOI of approximately 86 square miles but includes the Churn Creek Bottom area.
These changes aim to focus on inward expansion for future growth in Redding and ultimately reduce the amount of fire hazard area lands under the City’s jurisdiction. In addition, no substantive land use changes are proposed under the Plan. Buildout would not result in substantial changes to the circulation patterns or emergency access routes in the city or SOI , as identified in the City’s LHMP and EOP . The Emergency Management Division of the R FD coordinates emergency management functions within Redding, and the RFD adheres to the Standardized Emergency Management System (SEMS) and the National Incident Management System (NIMS) (CalEMA 2009). During an emergency, standard emergency response procedures of the Redding Police Department and RFD are conducted in tandem. The RFD also works with an array of comm unity partners, including utility service provides (water, power, sanitation), schools, residents, community organization, and other local stakeholders to enforce fire-safety protocols. Mutual aid agreements are also maintained with numerous surrounding local, state, and federal agencies to allow for appropriate backup services in case of an emergency, disaster, or other similar event.
Future development would be required to comply with applicable fire and building codes. To ensure emergency services in the city and SOI are not impaired by future development, all development projects in the city and SOI are reviewed by the RFD, prior to approval. In accordance with the California Fire Code, the R FD requires site design to consider fire access. Several of these requirements include vegetation management requirements, construction standards, and subdivision and building access, among others Packet Pg. 1554
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
WILDFIRE
5.18-32 FEBRUARY 2024
(Redding 2021). New development is required to comply with these regulations to provide sufficient clear emergency vehicle access.
Additionally, proposed General Plan contains the following policies would ensure effective emergency response:
▪ Policy PS4A: Strive to maintain an Insurance Service Office (ISO) rating of 3 or better . ▪ Policy PS4B: AllDesign new development and redevelopment projects should to meet state and local standards for fire protection; encourage the upgrade of existing structures to current standards. Encourage the installation of smoke detectors in residential and commercial facilities constructed prior to the requirement of their installation, as appropriate. ▪ Policy PS4J: Utilize techniques, as determined appropriate by the Fire Marshal, to reduce fire damage in those areas with a high wildland fire potential. ▪ Policy PS4K: Enforce subdivision regulations that generally limit cul -de-sac lengths to no greater than 600 feet and strive to ensure that sufficient emergency-vehicle turnaround areas are provided. ▪ Policy PS4L: Apply as appropriate, subdivision regulations requiring each residential development having 50 or more dwelling units and each commercial development employing 150 or more people to have at least two connected points of public access as may be determined necessary by the Fire Marshal.
▪ Policy PS4M: Seek to construct Construct emergency-vehicle access routes to open-space areas at optimal locations within projects during the development process, as funding or law allows. As funding and physical conditions allow, construct such access routes in existing developments where warranted.
▪ Policy PS4N: Strive to ensure Ensure new subdivisions have adequate fire protection measures such as multi -access for firefighting apparatus, noncombustible building construction, appropriate defensible space, street widths and grade to accommodate emergency vehicles and evacuees simultaneously.
▪ Policy PS4O: Strive to ma intain and augment mutual and automatic aid agreements with the California Department of Forestry & Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) and Shasta County. Support local fire protection agencies with efforts to seek funding for development and implementation of a continuous vegetation management program in fire hazard severity zones and WUI regions. ▪ Policy PS11A: Strive to ensure that emergency personnel receive adequate training in traffic-control and evacuation procedures as required by the City's Emergency Operations Plan. ▪ Policy PS11B: Evacuation routes contained within the City's Emergency Operations Plan should be published and reinforced in public materials as a general guide for improving the awareness and preparedness of residents located in high-hazard areas, as appropriate.
Packet Pg. 1555
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
WILDFIRE
PLACEWORKS 5.18-33
▪ Policy PS11C: Consider implementing an emergency evacuation plan and consistently educate residents on:
o Access: Evacuation routes laid out for residents to use in case of emergency. o Signage: Signage, wayfinding, and designated evacuation routes. o Communication: Timely notices that may arrive through multiple communication avenues. o Assistance: Available assistance programs to aid resident evacuation during emergency.
As discussed in Chapter 3, Project Description, the proposed project includes updates to existing goals, policies, and programs in the Redding General Plan. All future development, regardless of whether it includes new development or redevelopment, is required to comply with adopted local, regional, and State plans and regulations addressing emergency access, response, and evacuation. However, even with these requirements, construction of new development or redevelopment could cause a temporary impairment of an evacuation route due to road closure, and therefore impacts would be potentially significant.
Level of Significance without Mitigation: Impact WILD-1 would be potentially significant.
Mitigation Measures
WILD-1: Project applicants proposing development within a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone shall prepare a Traffic Control Plan to ensure that construction equipment or activities do not block roadways during the construction period. The Traffic Control Plan shall be submitted to the Redding Fire Department and Police Department for review and approval prior to approval of building permits.
WILD-2 Development under the 2023-2045 General Plan could exacerbate wildfire risks due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, thereby exposing project occupants to elevated particulate concentrations from a wildfire. [Threshold WILD-2]
The City of Redding and its SOI are vulnerable to and at significant risk of wildfires. Bordered by forest and woodlands, the City is in proximity to areas with fuel mixes that could easily ignite and encroach into the community. During a wildfire event, people within the air basin would be exposed to elevated levels of particulates. The type and extent of vegetation and fuel, wind and climatic patterns, general topography and canyons, and other local characteristics make the city more vulnerable to wildfires.
Figure 5.18-2 depicts the CAL FIRE mapped VHFHSZ’s in Redding and its SOI. The VHFHSZ includes areas potentially threatened by wildfires based on historical fire activity and prevalent vegetation types.
Residential neighborhoods, commercial zones, and open space areas are all located in VHFHSZ areas .
Development associated with buildout of the General Plan Update would result in new development in VHFHSZ areas. To protect development in the VHFHSZ, the City requires adherence to a wide range of state Packet Pg. 1556
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
WILDFIRE
5.18-34 FEBRUARY 2024
and local codes (California Fire Code, CAL FIRE fire safe design requirements, City Fire and Public Works Standards, RFD wildfire requirements, and other standards). Because development in these areas presents challenges for fire protection and suppression, development in these areas would be required to abide by those requirements.
Additionally, several policies in the 2023-2045 General Plan’s Public Safety Element emphasize and require fire-safe development in the City. Policy PS4B requires that all new development and redevelopment meet state and local standards for fire protection; Policy PS4D directs the City to e nforce existing codes and to include the Fire Department in the project review process ; Policy PS4H directs the City to w ork with local water districts to ensure that district systems are developed, maintained, and monitored to provide minimum fire-flow, rates, and peak-load capacity for fire suppression; and Policy PS4N would ensure that new subdivisions have adequate fire protec tion measures such as multi -access for firefighting apparatus, noncombustible building construction, appropriate defensible space, street widths and grade to accommodate emergency vehicles and evacuees simultaneously.
As shown in Figure 5.7-3, Landslide Susceptibility, in Section 5.7, Geology and Soils, a significant portion of the west side of the City contains steep slopes with high landslide susceptibility . Construction of potential future development in these areas may require grading and site preparation activities that could change the slope of a single parcel or site. However, all potential future development within Redding would be required to comply with the California Building Standards Code, SRA Fire Safe Regulations, and the requirements in the Redding Municipal Code, Chapter 9.20, Fire Code, which include standards to minimize the ignition and spread of wildfire due to slopes. Policy CDD6B in the proposed Community Development and Design Element also directs the City to consider establishing hillside development standards to decrease allowable residential densities with increase in site slope , l imit excessive grading on slopes , encourage use of multiple levels where appropriate, and minimize deforestation and disturbance of native vegetation outside the approved building footprint and street and utility corridors, while considering the Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP) for wildland fire protection.
Other factors, such as vegetation, have the potential to exacerbate wildfire risks. During late summer and fall when temperatures are high, relative humidity is low, and winds are high, forests and brush vegetation can dry out, particularly in areas with unirrigated vegetation, becoming extremely flammable and increasing wildfire risks. As described in Section 5.18.1.1, Regulatory Framework, the Redding LHMP and Shasta County Community Wildfire Protection Plan contain several vegetation management, fuel reduction, fuel break, chipper programs, and projects to reduce the uncontrolled spread of wildfire due to vegetation.
Additionally, all potential future development within wildfire-prone areas in Redding would be required to comply with SRA Fire Safe Regulations, Public Resources Code Section 4291, and the California Fire Code.
These regulations have specific requirements for new and existing development to create defensible space and extensive fuel reduction within 100 feet of a structure, an ember -resistant zone within 5 feet of a structure, and the overall maintenance of properties to reduce the risk of uncontrolled fires or the spread of fires to other properties.
Packet Pg. 1557
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
WILDFIRE
PLACEWORKS 5.18-35
Furthermore, the proposed 2023-2045 General Plan contains policies and actions for existing, new, and redevelopment projects that integrate with the LHMP , Community Wildfire Protection Plan, and other State and regional regulations to reduce wildfire risks associated with vegetation. ▪ Policy PS4E: Consider Prioritize developing and funding a comprehensive vegetation management and weed-abatement program, beyond the wildfire mitigation through the Electric Utility, for City- owned properties, open-space areas, including those that are located in existing subdivisions and in new developments to prevent and reduce the risk of fire. ▪ Policy PS4G: Consider establishingDevelop a program to construct and maintain fire -access roads in ravine areas considered to have a very high fire danger to enhance the ability to suppress wildland fires. These roads need not be surfaced and may also function as part of the City’s trail system. Erosion and impacts to native vegetation and natural features should be minimized. ▪ Policy PS4Q: Work toward educating the residents on the importance of fire safety, prevention, and emergency preparedness including vegetation management, decreasing fuel loads, hardening homes and structures, maintaining defensible space, and public safety notifications , to the extent feasible.
Adherence to the above building practices, fire safety regulations, and vegetation fuel management requirements would reduce the potential for exacerbating wildfire risks. However, due to the programmatic nature of this analysis, the unknown details and potential impacts of specific future potential development projects under the 2023 -2045 General Plan and the possibility of potential future development being located in wildfire-prone areas, impacts would still be potentially significant.
Level of Significance Before Mitigation: WILD-2 would be potentially significant.
Mitigation Measures
As discussed previously, implementation of the proposed 2023 -2045 General Plan could increase population, buildings, and infrastructure in wildfire-prone areas. With implementation of the General Plan 2040 policies and actions, and mandatory wildfire hazard reduction measures per state regulations, impacts related to exacerbating the risk of pollutant concentrations from wildfire and the uncontrolled spread of wildfire could be reduced, but not necessarily to a less-than-significant level.
As listed above, the proposed 2023-2045 General Plan contains policies that require existing development, new, and redevelopment projects to create and maintain fire -safe vegetation around structures and roadways, enforcement of fire-safe standards, and creation of fuel breaks. These policies and actions would not increase the number of people, buildings, and infrastructure, but would also not prohibit development under the proposed General Plan; however, they would provide the best wildfire hazard -reduction measures available.
Packet Pg. 1558
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
WILDFIRE
5.18-36 FEBRUARY 2024
However, the only way to fully avoid the wildfire impact from implementation of the proposed General Plan is to not allow development in areas within High and Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones and the WUI, thereby eliminating the wildfire impact. However, doing so is not feasible or practical as the C ity has a responsibility to meet other obligations, such as promoting both economic development and corresponding residential development, as required by State housing law, within its adopted growth boundaries. This conclusion does not prevent a finding of less-than-significant impacts at the project level; however, due to potential unknown impacts from future development under the 2023-2045 General Plan, impacts at the programmatic level would remain significant and unavoidable.
Level of Significance After Mitigation: WILD-2 would be significant and unavoidable.
WILD-3 The 2023 -2045 General Plan would not require the installation and maintenance of associated infrastructure in areas that are undeveloped or vacant , which could exacerbate fire risk or result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment. [Threshold WILD-3] Buildout of the proposed General Plan could result in additional infrastructure, such as roadways and transmission lines, in underdeveloped and undeveloped areas of the Planning Area in order to serve new development. Some of this new infrastructure would likely be constructed in the WUI or VHFHSZ. These types of improvements would involve temporary construction and result in changes to the existing built environment. The installation and operation of new aboveground power transmission lines would create a higher risk of exacerbating wildfire risks compared to other infrastructure. However, several policies in the Community Development and Design Element direct the City to underground new and existing electrical transmission lines.
▪ Policy CDD18A: Place new electric distribution lines underground in new development where feasible.
▪ Policy CDD18B: Place existing overhead distribution lines underground upon development of the abutting property where feasible.
▪ Policy CDD18C: Consider establishing a mechanism to systematically replace underground distribution lines in existing neighborhoods and commercial areas as funding sources are identified.
Additionally, the CPUC requires maintenance of vegetation around power lines, strict wire -to-wire clearances, annual inspections of aboveground power lines, and the preparation of fire prevention plans for aboveground power lines in high fire -threat distri cts. In addition, the REU Wildfire Mitigation Plan establishes requirements for vegetation management around power equipment. These measures would reduce the wildfire risks associated with the installation and maintenance of power lines.
Any development or redevelopment in the wildfire-prone areas of the City would also be required to comply with building and design standards in the California Building Code and California Fire Code, which include provisions for fire-resistant building materials, the clearance of debris, and fire safety requirements during Packet Pg. 1559
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
WILDFIRE
PLACEWORKS 5.18-37
demolition and construction activities. Public Resources Code Section 4291 also requires vegetation around buildings or structures to maintain defensible space within 100 feet of a structure and an ember -resistant zone within 5 feet of a structure. Additio nally, SRA Fire Safe Regulations would prevent structures from being placed within 30 feet of a roadway, reducing the potential for new roadways to exacerbate wildfire risks. These measures, along with policies and actions in the 2023-2045 General Plan for undergrounding of power lines, creation and maintenance of fuel breaks, and ensuring adequate emergency water supply would minimize wildfire risks associated with the installation and maintenance of infrastructure.
Such infrastructure and maintenance activities would also be required to comply with the adopted State regulations, Redding Municipal Code standards, and proposed General Plan 2040 policies and actions to mitigate the impact of infrastructure on the environment. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
Level of Significance Before Mitigation: WILD-3 would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.
WILD-4 The proposed project would not expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post -fire slope instability, or drainage changes. [Threshold WILD-4]
Catastrophic wildfires, such as the 2018 C arr Fire, can create favorable conditions for other hazards, such as flooding and landslides during the rainy season. Wildfires on steep slopes can burn the vegetation that stabilizes the slope and create hydrophobic conditions that prevent the ground from absorbing water . This can lead to landslides, debris flows, and flooding. A project would result in a significant impact if —due to slopes, drainage patterns, or post-fire slope instability—it would expose people or structures to significant risks from landsides, debris flows, or flooding.
As discussed in Chapter 5.10, Hydrology and Water Q uality, Redding contains lands within the 100 -year, 200-year, and 500-year floodplain. As shown in Figure 5.10 -3, Flood Zones Map, floodplains are primarily concentrated around the Sacramento River and numerous tributary streams that travel through the city. As discussed in Chapter 5.7, Geology and Soils, the western and northern portions of the city are in landslide- susceptible areas, with many of the moderate to high landslide potential areas coinciding with Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones. Many of the high landslide potential areas are on the steep slopes of canyons that have been carved out by rivers and creeks, creating overlapping flood-prone and landslide-prone areas in the steep slopes of the western portion of the city. This overlap may cause areas outside of a flood hazard or landslide -susceptible zone to be affected by runoff, post -fire slope instability, or drainage changes following a wildfire.
Packet Pg. 1560
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
WILDFIRE
5.18-38 FEBRUARY 2024
Potential future development under the 2023-2045 General Plan could contribute to post -fire slope instability or drainage changes upstream. However, proposed Public Safety Element Policy PS1C would require project proponents to determine , as required by the Building Official and/or City Engineer, the landslide, slope-instability, and erosion potential of proposed development sites located in potential hazard areas and utilize building setbacks, grading techniques, or appropriate measures when constructing in or near unstable areas. Policy PS2E limits new development in the 100 -year floodplain, except when if it can be demonstrated that such encroachments will not impact other properties or significantly contribute to a cumulative effect of other encroachments.
Additionally, all new development in the City is required to comply with State and local regulations, such as the California Building Code and Redding Municipal Code , both of which have provisions. For example, Section 1803 of the 20 22 California Building Code requires a geotechnical investigation that must assess existing landslide susceptibility on a project site. The Redding Municipal Code , Chapter 16.12 , Clearing, Grading, Fills and Excavation also requires a grading permit to control erosion and slope stability.
Moreover, the proposed General Plan Public Safety Element contains Policy PS1B, requiring geotechnical investigations for development on sites with potential hazards and Policy PS4F, directing the City to facilitate post-fire recovery of open space areas by supporting efforts to stabilize slopes, control erosion, and replant areas with native species as appropriate. Furthermore, the 2023-2045 General Plan Public Safety Element contains the following policies and actions to minimize runoff and prevent flooding:
▪ Policy PS2A: Continue to participate in the National Flood Insurance Program to ensure the availability of federally sponsored floodplain insurance for City residents. ▪ Policy PS2B: Continue efforts to reduce flood insurance premiums for City residents by restricting floodplain development and participating in the federal Community Rating Service Program. ▪ Policy PS2C: Consider the update of the Periodically update the Community Development and Design Element and the General Plan Diagram to reflect the current floodplain mapping data provided by FEMA and local studies such as the City’s Montgomery Watson study. As funding is available, update these local studies to ensure that they reflect the best available information. Make maps available and accessible showing updated flood projections from a 100 -year storm event; update the maps as new information is available.
▪ Policy PS2D: Work with local, regional, State and Federal agencies to maintain an adequate information base, prepare risk assessments, identify strategies, and seek appropriate funding for mitigation and flood protection.
▪ Policy PS2E: Strive to preserve Preserve the river and creek corridors, and strictly limit by strictly limiting development in areas subject to flooding from a 100 -year storm event. Allow minor encroachments into floodplains if it can be demonstrated that such encroachments will not impact other properties or significantly contribute to a cumulative effect of other encroachments.
Packet Pg. 1561
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
WILDFIRE
PLACEWORKS 5.18-39
▪ Policy PS2F: Continue to utilize the Storm Drain Utility or similar measures, as funding mechanisms for necessary drainage improvements throughout the City. ▪ Policy PS2G: Continue to require that individual development projects mitigate their stormwater impacts in accordance with City Council Policy 1806 (Floodplain Development and Stormwater Detention) and/or other policy or regulations that the City may establish for this purpose. ▪ Policy PS2H: Continue to require new development and redevelopment projects to minimize hazards of flooding and demonstrate that existing and/or planned (on- or offsite) drainage facilities are sized to accommodate project storm runoff and to prevent or mitigate off-site increase in peak runoff rates and flood elevations.
▪ Policy PS2I: Require that critical public facilities, such as hospitals, emergency shelters, emergency command centers, fire and police stations, and similar facilities be designed to mitigate potential flood risk to ensure operation during a flood event, to the extent feasible. ▪ Policy PS2J: Adhere to the requirements of the City’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) MS4 Permit, including, but not limited to the periodic inspection of stormwater channels for vegetation build -up or encroachment, trash and debris, silt and gr avel build -up, erosion or any other obstruction to reduce the risk of localized flooding. Work to alleviate pre- existing flooding conditions that are a result of past practices and regulations.
New development complying with these policies and actions in the 2023 -2045 General Plan would not expose people or structures to downslope landslides or downstream flooding due to post -fire hazards.
Furthermore, as identified in Impact s WILD-1 and WILD -2, above, development under the 2023 -2045 General Plan must also comply with best management practices regarding wildfire prevention, action, and recovery as outlined in the Redding EOP , LHMP , and Community Wildfire Protection Plan. All future development, regardless of the location, is required to comply with adopted local, regional, and State plans and regulations addressing wildfire prevention, which would minimize risks of post -fire hazards. As such, compliance with these policies and regulatory requirements would ensure impacts from post-fire instability would be less than significant.
Level of Significance Before Mitigation: WILD-4 would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required.
Packet Pg. 1562
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
WILDFIRE
5.18-40 FEBRUARY 2024
5.18.5 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
WILD-5 The proposed project, in combination with past, present, and reasonably foreseeable projects, would result in less -than-significant cumulative impacts with respect to wildfire. [Threshold WILD-5] The cumulative setting includes potential future development in Redding and the surrounding region. Future development under the proposed project would not exacerbate wildfire risks due to the installation or maintenance of infrastructure and would not cause downslope or downstream post -fire flooding or landslide hazards. Potential impacts to emergency response and evacuation plans would be minimized through the implementation of Mitigation Measure WILD -1. Cumulative development in adjacent jurisdictions would be subject to the same State regulations. Although federal lands would not be subject to State regulations, they would still be subject to the National Cohesive Wildfire Management Strategy and the Health Forests Restoration Act, in addition to specific wildfire management provisions implemented by the USFS.
However, the proposed project would result in significant and unavoidable impacts where it would potentially expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or uncontrolled spread of a wildfire due to slope, prevailing winds, or other factors, as described in Impact WILD -2. The addition of other proposed development projects in adjacent jurisdictions, including federal lands, would have the potential to contribute to cumulative wild fire risks. These projects would have the potential to result in significant environmental impacts and they could also potentially expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or uncontrolled spread of a wildfire due to slope, prevailing winds, or other factors. These would potentially result in cumulatively considerable impacts when taken into consideration with the General Plan. In general, the increase of potential development projects within the SRA or Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone would result in a cumulatively significant impact, and since contributions from the proposed project would result in significant impacts, the proposed project would result in cumulatively considerable impacts. Therefore, cumulative wildfire impacts would be potentially significant.
Level of Significance Before Mitigation: WILD-5 would be potentially significant.
Mitigation Measures
Implement Mitigation Measure WILD-1. There are no additional feasible mitigation measures available to reduce this cumulative impact to a less-than-significant level.
Level of Significance After Mitigation: WILD-5 would be significant and unavoidable.
Packet Pg. 1563
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
WILDFIRE
PLACEWORKS 5.18-41
5.18.6 REFERENCES
Arthur, D. & Chapman, M. 2021, October 3. Fawn Fire near Redding 100% contained; cost $25 million to suppress. Redding Record Searchlight. https://www.redding.com/story/news/2021/10/03/fawn- fire-near-redding-100-contained-cost-25-million-suppress/5983085001/ Balch, Jennifer; Bradley, Bethany; Abatzoglou, John, et. al. 2017, March 14. Human-Started Wildfires Expand the Fire Niche Across the United States. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS): Volume 114 No. 11, https://www.pnas.org/content/pnas/114/11/2946.full.pdf.
California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR). 2022. Sugar Pine Conservation Camp #9, https://www.cdcr .ca.gov/facility-locator/conservation-camps/sugar-pine/ accessed April 21, 2022.
California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE). 1999. Learning to Live with Fire, https://www.fire.ca.gov/media/8657/live_w_fire.pdf.
––––––. 2008. Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones in LRA: Redding. https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/media/5992/redding.pdf
––––––. 2018. 2018 Strategic Fire Plan for California, https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/media/5590/2018-strategic- fire-plan-approved-08_22_18.pdf.
––––––. 2019. “Know The Law For Defensible Space And Hardening Your Home.” https://www.readyforwildfire.org/more/fire-safety-
laws/#:~:text=By%20following%20the%20law%2C%20you,mile%20away%20from%20a%20wildfir e.
––––––. 2020. California Code of Regulations Title 14 Natural Resources Division 1.5 Department of Forestry Chapter 7 - Fire Protection Subchapter 2 SRA Fire Safe Regulations Articles 1-5. https://humboldtgov.org/DocumentCenter/View/95813/SRA-Fire-Safe-Regulations-2020-PDF ––––––. 2022, January 13. Top 20 Most Destructive California Wildfires. https://www.fire.ca.gov/media/t1rdhizr/top20_destruction.pdf ––––––. 2023a, February 20 (Accessed). “Stats and Events.” https://www.fire.ca.gov/stats-events/. ––––––. 2023b, June 14 (Accessed). Carr Fire. https://www.fire.ca.gov/incidents/2018/7/23/carr-fire
California Emergency Management Agency (CalEMA). 2009. Standardized Emergency Management System Guidelines.
https://www.calbo.org/sites/main/files/fileattachments/eoc_info_12_sems_guidelines_complete. pdf?1558563094
Packet Pg. 1564
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
WILDFIRE
5.18-42 FEBRUARY 2024
California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC), 2021. CPUC Fire Safety Rulemaking Background. https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/industries-and-topics/wildfires/fire-threat-maps-and-fire-safety- rulemaking
––––––. 2022a, April 4 (Accessed). CPUC High Fire Threat District. https://ia.cpuc.ca.gov/firemap/. ––––––. 2022b. Press release: CPUC Adopts New Fire-Safety Regulations. http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/PublishedDocs/Published/G000/M201/K352/201352402.PDF.
Chandler, M. 2019, July 26. Carr Fire recovery, 1 year later: Why hundreds of homes still haven't been rebuilt. Redding Record Searchlight. https://www.redding.com/story/news/2019/07/26/carr-fire- rebuilding-homes-shasta-county-families-return-california/1662099001/ Community Planning Assistance for Wildfire. 2019. Final Recommendations for Redding, CA. https://cpaw.headwaterseconomics.org/wp-
content/uploads/2020/01/FINAL_CPAW_Redding_Report_2019_Dec-13.pdf Department of Finance (DOF). 2022, January 1. Table 2: E-5 City/County Population and Housing Estimates, 1/1/2022. https://dof.ca.gov/forecasting/demographics/estimates/e-5-population-and- housing-estimates-for-cities-counties-and-the-state-2020-2022/ Federal Register . 2001, January 4. Urban Wildland Interface Communities Within the Vicinity of Federal Lands That Are at High Risk From Wildfire.
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2001/01/04/01-52/urban-wildland-interface- communities-within-the-vicinity-of-federal-lands-that-are-at-high-risk-from ICC Digital Codes, 2019, Chapter 49 Requirements for Wildland-Urban Interface Fire Areas, https://codes.iccsafe.org/content/CAFC2016E0917/chapter-49-requirements-for-wildland-urban- interface-fire-areas, accessed June 18, 2021.
Natural Resources Canada. 2018. Fire Behavior . https://www.nrcan.gc.ca/forests/fire-insects- disturbances/fire/13145.
Pacific Biodiversity Institute. 2007. Roads and Wildfires. http://www.pacificbio.org/publications/wildfire_studies/Roads_And_Wildfires_2007.pdf.
Redding, City of. 2008, July. Fire Safe Building Construction and Methods for Wildland-Urban Interface Fire Areas. https://www.cityofredding.org/home/showdocument?id=3650 ––––––. 2014, September . Emergency Operations Plan.
https://www.cityofredding.org/home/showpublisheddocument/23422/637188367475300000 ––––––. 2022a, December 20. City of Redding Municipal Code, Ordinance No. 2656. https://library.municode.com/ca/redding/ordinances/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=1188757 Packet Pg. 1565
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
WILDFIRE
PLACEWORKS 5.18-43
––––––. 2022b. Wildfire Information Map.
https://redding.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=94b379a91e0f47cb91712da 22f603d39
––––––. 2023, February. City of Redding Local Hazard Mitigation Plan 2022-2027. https://www.cityofredding.org/home/showpublisheddocument/28877/638131951485400000 Redding Electric Utility. 2021, December 7. Wildfire Mitigation Plan. https://www.cityofredding.org/home/showpublisheddocument/25486/637750022290300000 Shasta Area Safety Communications Agency (SHASCOM). 2022. http://www.shascom911.com/ Shasta County & City of Anderson. 2017, November 16. Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan. https://www.co.shasta.ca.us/docs/libraries/public-works-docs/hmp-documents/shasta-county- hazard-mitigation-plan-november-2017.pdf
Shasta County Office of Emergency Services. 2014, September . Emergency Operations Plan. https://www.shastacounty.gov/sites/default/files/fileattachments/county_administrative_office/p age/2388/entire-eop-458-pp.pdf
Weather Spark. 2023, February 22. Climate and Average Weather Year Round in Redding. https://weatherspark.com/y/664/Average-Weather-in-Redding-California-United-States-Year- Round
Western Shasta Resource Conservation District (RCD).2016. Shasta County Communities Wildfire Protection Plan.
https://www.shastafiresafe.org/_files/ugd/80da86_1dc5754f4f184d4ba5f1c6f66b84a28b.pdf
Packet Pg. 1566
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
WILDFIRE
5.18-44 FEBRUARY 2024
This page intentionally left blank.
Packet Pg. 1567
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding) PLACEWORKS 6-1
Other CEQA Assessment
Section 15126(b) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines requires an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) to describe any significant impacts of the proposed Project , including those which can be mitigated but not reduced to a level of insignificance. Significant impacts of a proposed Project that cannot be reduced to a less than significant level are referred to as significant and unavoidable impacts .
This chapter provides an overview of the significant and unavoidable impacts of the proposed Project, as well as impacts found not to be significant, growth inducement, significant and unavoidable impacts, and significant irreversible changes.
A more detailed analysis of the effects the proposed Project would have on the environment , and proposed mitigation measures to minimize significant environmental impacts, are provided in Sections 5.1 through 5.18 of this EIR.
6.1 SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF THE
PROPOSED PROJECT
Sections 5.1 through 5.18 of Chapter 5, Environmental Evaluation, of this EIR evaluate the significant effects of the proposed Project and provide mitigation for impacts that can be reduced to a less than significant level. Each chapter discusses the significant impact and provides a corresponding mitigation measure. The mitigation measures are summarized in Chapter 1, Executive Summary, of this EIR.
6.2 SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS WHICH CANNOT
BE AVOIDED IF THE PROPOSED PROJECT IS IMPLEMENTED
Pursuant to Section 15126.2(b) of the CEQA Guidelines, this EIR considers the significant environmental effects that cannot be avoided if the proposed project is implemented. Impacts of the proposed project can be reduced to less than significant except for:
Agricultural and Forestry Resources
▪ Impact AG-1: The proposed project would convert Prime Farmland to urban land use. ▪ Impact AG-3: The proposed project would result in loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use.
Packet Pg. 1568
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
CEQA-MANDATED ASSESSMENT
6-2 FEBRUARY 2024
▪ Impact AG -5: The proposed project, in combination with past, present, and reasonably foreseeable projects, would result in significant and unavoidable cumulative impacts with respect to agricultural and forestry resources.
Air Quality
▪ Impact AQ-1: The proposed project would conflict with or obstruct implementation of the 2021 Air Quality Attainment Plan.
▪ Impact AQ-2: Construction of the proposed project would generate regional and localized emissions of criteria air pollutants or precursor emissions in excess of the SCAQMD thresholds, resulting in a cumulatively considerable net increase of criteria pollutants for which the project region is non -attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard and potentially exposing sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. ▪ Impact AQ-3: Operation of the proposed project would generate regional and localized emissions of criteria air pollutants or precursor emissions in excess of the SCAQMD thresholds, resulting in a cumulatively considerable net increase of criteria pollutants for which the project region is non - attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard and potentially exposing sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. ▪ Impact AQ-5: The proposed project, in combination with past, present, and reasonably foreseeable projects, would result in significant cumulative impacts with respect to air quality.
Biological Resources
▪ Impact BIO -6: The proposed project, in combination with past, present, and reasonably foreseeable projects, would result in significant and unavoidable cumulative impacts with respect to biological resources.
Cultural Resources
▪ Impact CULT-1: The proposed project could cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
▪ Impact GHG-1: The project would generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment.
▪ Impact GHG-3: Implementation of the proposed project would, in combination with past, present, and reasonably foreseeable projects, result in a cumulative impact with respect to GHG emissions.
Packet Pg. 1569
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
CEQA-MANDATED ASSESSMENT
PLACEWORKS 6-3
Noise
▪ Impact NOI-2: Buildout of the Planning Area would cause a substantial traffic noise increase on local roadways and could locate sensitive receptors in areas that exceed established noise standards
Wildfire
▪ Impact WILD-2: Development under the 2023 -2045 General Plan could exacerbate wildfire risks due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, thereby exposing project occupants to elevated particulate concentrations from a wildfire
▪ Impact WILD -5: The proposed project, in combination with past, present, and reasonably foreseeable projects, would result in less -than-significant cumulative impacts with respect to wildfire
6.3 SIGNIFICANT IRREVERSIBLE ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGES
WHICH WOULD BE INVOLVED IN THE PROPOSED PROJECT
SHOULD IT BE IMPLEMENTED
The CEQA Guidelines require that an EIR describe any significant irreversible environmental changes that would be caused by the proposed project if it is implemented. Specifically, Section 15126.2(c) of the CEQA Guidelines states:
Uses of nonrenewable resources during the initial and continued phases of the project may be irreversible since a large commitment of such resources makes removal or nonuse thereafter unlikely. Primary impacts and, particularly, secondary impacts (such as highways improvement which provides access to a previously inaccessible area) generally commit future generations to similar uses. Also, irreversible damage can result from environmental accidents associated with the project. Irretrievable commitments of resources should be evaluated to assure that such current consumption is justified.
The following significant irreversible changes would be caused by implementation of the proposed project:
▪ Conversion of Prime Farmland as discussed in Section 5.2, Agricultural and Forestry Resources, of this EIR. Future development and growth under the proposed project can result in the conversion of farmland to nonagricultural uses that will result in the loss of agricultural lands. ▪ Conversion of forestland to non -forest land uses to accommodate future demand as discussed in Section 5.2, Agricultural and Forestry Resources.
Packet Pg. 1570
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
CEQA-MANDATED ASSESSMENT
6-4 FEBRUARY 2024
The commitment of resources required for the future development under the proposed project would reduce the availability of resources for future generations or for other uses during the life of the proposed project.
6.4 GROWTH-INDUCING IMPACT OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT
Pursuant to Sections 15126(d) and 15126.2(d) of the CEQA Guidelines, this section is provided to examine ways in which the proposed project could foster economic or population growth or the construction of additional housing, either directly or indirectly, in the surrounding environment. To add ress this issue, potential growth-inducing effects will be examined through analysis of four questions:
▪ Would this project remove obstacles to growth, e.g. , through the construction or extension of major infrastructure facilities that do not presently exist in the project area, or through changes in existing regulations pertaining to land development?
▪ Would this project result in the need to expand one or more public services to maintain desired levels of service?
▪ Would this project encourage or facilitate economic effects that could result in other activities that could significantly affect the environment?
▪ Would approval of this project involve some precedent -setting action that could encourage and facilitate other activities that could significantly affect the environment? Please note that growth-inducing effects are not to be construed as necessarily beneficial, detrimental, or of little significance to the environment. This issue is presented to provide additional information on ways in which this project could contribute to significant changes in the environment, beyond the direct consequences of developing the land use concept examined in the preceding sections of this EIR.
Would this project remove obstacles to growth, e.g., through the construction or extension of major infrastructure facilities that do not presently exist in the project area, or through changes in existing regulations pertaining to land development?
The proposed project would include the Community Development and Design Element which determines the City’s potential growth for the next 22 years. The Community Development and Design Element will exert a strong influence on how the City will grow in the coming decades and significantly impact the quality of life of the community as well as guide physical changes that exclusively occur based on market demand. As shown in Table 3 -1, Planning Boundaries , in Chapter 3, Project Description , the Redding Planning Area, SOI, City limits, primary and secondary growth areas are shown. The new growth is focused in areas of the city where services exist or can be expanded/extended to serve additional and more intensive development where appropriate. The proposed project aims at p ursuing urban infill projects which would allow for more accessible transit and walkability thus reducing vehicle miles traveled and subsequent greenhouse gas emissions.
Packet Pg. 1571
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
CEQA-MANDATED ASSESSMENT
PLACEWORKS 6-5
Would this project result in the need to expand one or more public services to maintain desired levels of service?
Impacts to public services are discussed in Section 5.15, Public Services and Recreation , of this EIR. It should be noted that the proposed project does not any propose any land use actions or development that would induce population growth. However, as new development occurs, under the proposed project, new or expanded public service facilities may be needed to support the associated population growth. It is not known at this point when such public facilities would be required or what the exact nature of these facilities would be. As a result, it cannot be determined what project -specific environmental impacts would occur from their construction and operation. The potential impacts would be identified during the facility planning process . As mentioned in Chapter 3, Project Description, of the EIR, the new growth is focused in areas of the city where services exist or can be expanded/extended to serve additional and more intensive development where appropriate.
Would this project encourage or facilitate economic effects that could result in other activities that could significantly affect the environment?
The General Plan Update includes the Economic Development Element which contains policies aimed at increasing economic opportunities in the City. Policy ED3A addresses the need to prepare an inventory of developable industrial land generally free of significant development constraints in order to accommodate projected industrial growth over a 2 2-year timeframe. This Policy could significantly affect the environment by increasing industrial uses that could change the air quality of the area. However, Policy ED3B states that the City should also pursue environmental mitigation strategies to remove impediments to industrial growth, such as mitigation banks, habitat conservation plans, regional storm-water detention, and air quality programs. In addition, Policy ED6A states that the City should consider developing transportation alternatives to connect the airport with downtown and other vital economic areas. This has the potential economic growth that could affect the surrounding area of the airport and downtown.
Would approval of this project involve some precedent -setting action that could encourage and facilitate other activities that could significantly affect the environment? As mentioned in Chapter 3, Project Description, of this EIR, the proposed project would designate Primary and Secondary Growth Areas to eliminate areas within the Sphere of Influence (SOI), thus potentially leading to a reduction in the SOI by Shasta LAFCO . The proposed project would not change the e xisting General Plan, land use classifications and configurations would remain unaffected.
6.5 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ELEMENT
As part of the City’s General Plan Update, State law requires the City to evaluate the potential impacts to disadvantaged communities (DAC’s). SB 1000 provides two definitions of a DAC, one based on CalEnviroScreen scores and the other based on the presence of low -income areas with high pollution burden. The City contain s 17 census tracts with household incomes at or below 80 percent of the statewide median income, which are considered “low -income areas” under the second definition of a Packet Pg. 1572
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
CEQA-MANDATED ASSESSMENT
6-6 FEBRUARY 2024
disadvantaged community under SB 1000. There are four areas that meet the criteria through the analysis of CalEnviroScreen’s pollution burden indicators.
The Environmental Justice Element is implemented through the proposed General Plan’s Community Health, Wellness, and Environmental Justice Element. The Community Health, Wellness, and Environmental Justice Element would introduce new policies, actions, and goals aim to promote environmental justice and social equity within the City, such as promoting the engagement of environmental justice-affected communities and increases access to public transportation. The addition of these new policies would not enable future development, nor do they detail specific infrastructure improvements or projects. Rather the new policies aim to identify specific environmental justice challenges that affect communities and address these issues. As these policies are either part of a project subject to CEQA or would be the communication and outreach requirements leading to a future action, the policies, actions, and goals would not result in physical environmental impacts.
6.6 THE MITIGATION MEASURES PROPOSED TO MINIMIZE THE
SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS
Mitigation measures linked to significant impacts are discussed in Sections 5.1 through 5.18 of this EIR.
The mitigation measures are also summarized in Table 1-1, Summary of Environmental Impacts, Mitigation Measures, and Levels of Significance After Mitigation, of Chapter 1, Executive Summary.
Packet Pg. 1573
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding) PLACEWORKS 7-1
Alternatives
The following chapter is intended to inform the public and decision makers of the feasible alternatives that would avoid or substantially lessen any significant effects of the Project.
7.1 INTRODUCTION
7.1.1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires that an environmental impact report (EIR) include a discussion of reasonable project alternatives that would “feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project but would avoid or substantially lessen any significant effects of the project and evaluate the comparative merits of the alternatives” (CEQA Guidelines § 15126.6[a]). As required by CEQA, this chapter identifies and evaluates potential alternatives to the proposed project.
Section 15126.6 of the CEQA Guidelines explains the foundation and legal requirements for the alternatives analysis in an EIR. Key provisions are:
▪ “[T]he discussion of alternatives shall focus on alternatives to the project or its location which are capable of avoiding or substantially lessening any significant effects of the project, even if these alternatives would impede to some degree the attainment of the project objectives or would be more costly.” (15126.6[b])
▪ “The specific alternative of ‘no project’ shall also be evaluated along with its impact.” (15126.6[e][1]) ▪ “The no project analysis shall discuss the existing conditions at the time the notice of preparation is published, or if no notice of preparation is published, at the time environmental analysis is commenced, as well as what would be reasonably expected to occur in the foreseeable future if the project were not approved, based on current plans and consistent with available infrastructure and community services.
If the environmentally superior alternative is the ‘no project’ alternative , the EIR shall also i dentify an environmentally superior alternative among the other alternatives.” (15126.6[e][2]) ▪ “The range of alternatives required in an EIR is governed by a ‘rule of reason’ that requires the EIR to set forth only those alternatives necessary to permit a reasoned choice. The alternatives shall be limited to ones that would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project.” (15126.6[f]) ▪ “Among the factors that may be taken into account when addressing the feasibility of alternatives are site suitability, economic viability, availability of infrastructure, general plan consistency, other plans or regulatory limitations, jurisdictional boundaries…, and whether the proponent can reasonably acquire, control or otherwise have access to the alternative site (or the site is already owned by the proponent)” (15126.6[f][1]).
Packet Pg. 1574
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
ALTERNATIVES
7-2 FEBRUARY 2024
▪ “Only locations that would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project need be considered for inclusion in the EIR.” (15126.6[f][2][A]) ▪ “An EIR need not consider an alternative whose effect cannot be reasonably ascertained and whose implementation is remote and speculative.” (15126.6[f][3]) Among the factors that may be taken into account when addressing the feasibility of alternatives are site suitability, economic viability, availability of infrastructure, general plan consistency, other plans or regulatory limitations, jurisdictional boundaries (projects with a regionally significant impact should consider the regional context), and whether the proponent can reasonably acquire, control or otherwise have access to the alternative site (or the site is already owned by the proponent). No one of these factors establishes a fixed limit on the scope of reasonable alternatives.
For each alternative, this analysis:
▪ Describes the alternative.
▪ Analyzes the impact of the alternative as compared to the proposed project. ▪ Identifies the impacts of the project that would be avoided or lessened by the alternative. ▪ Assesses whether the alternative would meet most of the primary project objectives. ▪ Evaluates the comparative merits of the alternative and the project.
According to Section 15126.6(d) of the CEQA Guidelines, “[i]f an alternative would cause…significant effects in addition those that would be caused by the project as proposed, the significant effects of the alternative shall be discussed, but in less detail than the significant effects of the project as proposed.”
7.1.2 PROJECT OBJECTIVES
As discussed in Chapter 3, Project Description, of this EIR, the following objectives have been established for the proposed project and will aid decision makers in their review of the project, the project alternatives, and associated environmental impacts.
▪ Advance the City’s vision for a resilient, equitable, and healthy community with high -quality development within its urban centers and corridors.
▪ Maintain the existing land use classifications of the existing General Plan Diagram while addressing the use of development incentives to spur new infill development/redevelopment consistent with the existing land use classifications.
▪ Encourage a more compact urban form by reducing the Planning Area to a more realistic growth boundary.
▪ Establish thresholds and maintain roadway and intersection levels of service for the public’s health and convenience while striving to minimize increases in vehicle miles travelled from new development. ▪ Provide park and recreation opportunities throughout the community, including those areas where facilities and services are not available.
Packet Pg. 1575
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
ALTERNATIVES
PLACEWORKS 7-3
▪ Work with appropriate agencies and organizations to increase resident’s access to healthcare, healthy food, transportation options, public services, housing, and healthy neighborhoods.
7.1.3 SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS
Agricultural and Forestry Resources
• Impact AG-1: The proposed project would convert Prime Farmland to urban land use. • Impact AG-3: The proposed project would result in loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use.
• Impact AG-5: The proposed project, in combination with past, present, and reasonably foreseeable projects, would result in significant and unavoidable cumulative impacts with respect to agricultural and forestry resources.
Air Quality
• Impact AQ-1: The proposed project would conflict with or obstruct implementation of the 2021 Air Quality Attainment Plan.
• Impact AQ-2: Construction of the proposed project would generate regional and localized emissions of criteria air pollutants or precursor emissions in excess of the SCAQMD thresholds, resulting in a cumulatively considerable net increase of criteria pollutants for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard and potentially exposing sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. • Impact AQ-3: Operation of the proposed project would generate regional and localized emissions of criteria air pollutants or precursor emissions in excess of the SCAQMD thresholds, resulting in a cumulatively considerable net increase of criteria pollutants for which the project region is non- attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard and potentially exposing sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. • Impact AQ-5: The proposed project, in combination with past, present, and reasonably foreseeable projects, would result in significant cumulative impacts with respect to air quality.
Biological Resources
• Impact BIO-6: The proposed project, in combination with past, present, and reasonably foreseeable projects, would result in significant and unavoidable cumulative impacts with respect to biological resources.
Cultural Resources
• Impact CULT-1: The proposed project could cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5.
Packet Pg. 1576
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
ALTERNATIVES
7-4 FEBRUARY 2024
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
• Impact GHG-1: The project would generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment. • Impact GHG-3: Implementation of the proposed project would, in combination with past, present, and reasonably foreseeable projects, result in a cumulative impact with respect to GHG emissions.
Noise
• Impact NOI-2: Buildout of the Planning Area would cause a substantial traffic noise increase on local roadways and could locate sensitive receptors in areas that exceed established noise standards
Wildfire
• Impact WILD-2: Development under the 2023-2045 General Plan could exacerbate wildfire risks due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, thereby exposing project occupants to elevated particulate concentrations from a wildfire
• Impact WILD-5: The proposed project, in combination with past, present, and reasonably foreseeable projects, would result in less-than-significant cumulative impacts with respect to wildfire
7.2 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED AND REJECTED DURING THE
SCOPING/PROJECT PLANNING PROCESS
The following is a discussion of the land use alternatives considered during the scoping and planning process and the reasons why they were not selected for detailed analysis in this EIR.
7.2.1 ALTERNATIVE LOCATION
The proposed General Plan covers the entire City and the Sphere of Influence. Alternative locations are typically included in an environmental document to avoid, lessen, or eliminate the significant impacts of a project by considering the proposed development in an entirely different location. To be feasible, development of off-site locations must be able to fulfill the project purpose and meet most of the project’s basic objectives. Given the nature of the proposed project (adoption of a General Plan for the entire city and sphere of influence), it is not possible to consider an off -site alternative because the city boundaries have been established through incorporation and the SOI established by LAFCO. For this reason, an off-site alternative was considered infeasible pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(c) and was rejected as a feasible project alternative.
Packet Pg. 1577
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
ALTERNATIVES
PLACEWORKS 7-5
7.2.2 ALTERNATIVE LAND USE PLAN
A reduced density alternative would result in fewer residences and less non-residential development, which would theoretically reduce traffic and thereby reduce community impacts such as air quality, greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, traffic, noise, and demand for utilities and public services. However, such an alternative would not achieve or would only partially achieve General Plan objectives of providing for growth of the City. This alternative would not provide needed housing as projected by the state Department of Housing and Community Development, increase jobs in the City, or foster growth in the focus and identified opportunity areas rather than in sensitive aeras or through annexation. By significantly restricting growth, the environmental impact of the projected growth would increase development pressure elsewhere in the region. As a reduced development density conflicts with regional plans, would relocate impacts outside of the city, and would not meet the project objectives, this option was not evaluated in this EIR.
7.2.3 NO FURTHER DEVELOPMENT OF HISTORIC STRUCTURES
The environmental analysis identified the potential for future development to modify or remove buildings that could qualify as historic. This alternative would establish a policy to prevent projects that would affect historic buildings. Many of the potentially historic buildings in the City are in and around the downtown and are commercial in nature. Preventing modification of the commercial buildings would limit their economic use and could result in decay and ultimately abandonment of the buildings. Some of the modifications envisioned by the General Plan include adding housing in and near the downtown. This alternative would either prevent or make this effort more difficult. Fewer residents near commerce and employment would increase vehicle miles travell ed (VMT) as customers and employees would need to drive downtown. The proposed project includes policy NR9F that, if implemented, would create an inventory of historic buildings and municipal code Section 18.23 Historic/Architectural Preservation regulates how and when historic buildings can be modified. The California Building Code also includes a historic buildings provision that recognizes challenges with these unique resources and allows for improvements consistent with the age and use of the structure. Because the use and reuse of potentially historic buildings is essential to the success of the downtown, and important to ensure that the building owner can continue to maintain the structure(s), this alternative is considered infeasible and not evaluated in this EIR.
7.2.4 TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS
For properties that have biological and cultural resources , current City polices allow for clustering of development to ensure that protecting the resource doesn’t preclude the ability of the property to be developed efficiently. This alternative would establish a program that would allow owners to extend the transfer of development potential to other land in the City. A transfer of development right (TDR) program is difficult to administer as it requires that the City keep track of development ‘potential’ created on one parcel and both remove the development potential on that parcel then move the development potential to another receiving property. A program like this would also need to ensure that both the original and receiving properties meet the development expectations established in the General Plan. The ability of a Packet Pg. 1578
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
ALTERNATIVES
7-6 FEBRUARY 2024
property owner to cluster development to avoid resources on a site is seen as a sufficient method of encouraging the protection of resources within the City. The City can also consider specific plans or specialized zoning if several parcels are combined to allow protection of resources and allocation of development. Because of the combination of complexity and existing ability to cluster development this alternative is considered infeasible and not evaluated in this EIR.
7.3 ALTERNATIVES SELECTED FOR FURTHER ANALYSIS
Based on the criteria listed above, the following three alternatives have been determined to represent a reasonable range of alternatives which have the potential to feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project, but which may avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project. These alternatives are analyzed in detail in the following sections. ▪ No Project/Existing General Plan – This is the only EIR alternative that is specifically required by the CEQA Guidelines (Section 15126.6[e] ) The No Project alternative does not represent a no - development or no change scenario as the City has an existing General Plan . Further, the land use diagram in the existing General Plan is unchanged with the proposed project. This alternative will focus on the potential result of not updating the General Plan to include changes to state law that have occurred since the adoption of the current plan in 2000 and not reducing the proposed Planning Area.
▪ No Annexation – This alternative was selected to reduce or eliminate the potential to convert prime agricultural/forest land to urban uses, reduce exposure to wildfire, and protect biological resources.
The alternative would establish a no-expansion beyond the existing city limits policy for the General Plan that would prevent annexation thereby increasing the development potential and land value of infill properties already within the City.
▪ Increased Intensity – A primary goal of the proposed project is to encourage development consistent with the existing land use pattern of the City, however, as a General Plan update the City can consider changes to the land use pattern. A greater density and intensity would reduc e the need for annexation which would reduce the potential to convert prime agricultural/forest land to urban uses, reduce exposure to wildfire, and protect biological resources. This alternative could also reduce vehicle miles trav elled (VMT) with corresponding reductions in air quality and greenhouse gas emission impacts.
An EIR must identify an “environmentally superior” alternative and where the No Project Alternative is identified as environmentally superior, the EIR is then required to identify as environmentally superior an alternative from among the others evaluated. Each alternative's environmental impacts are compared to the proposed project and determined to be environmentally superior, neutral, or inferior . Section 7.7 identifies the Environmentally Superior Alternative. The preferred land use alternative (proposed project) is analyzed in detail in Chapter 5 of this DEIR.
Packet Pg. 1579
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
ALTERNATIVES
PLACEWORKS 7-7
7.4 NO PROJECT/EXISTING GENERAL PLAN ALTERNATIVE
The No Project Alternative is required to discuss the existing conditions at the time the notice of preparation is published and evaluate what would reasonably be expected to occur in the foreseeable future if the proposed project is not approved (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15126.6[e]). Pursuant to CEQA, this Alternative is also based on current plans and consistent with available infrastructure and community services.
Therefore, the No Project/Existing General Plan Alternative assumes that the proposed proje ct would not be adopted, and the development intensity assumed in the existing General Plan would be followed.
The proposed project would not alter the City’s existing land use designations and no new density would be added to the City’s Planning Area (PA). However, as discussed in Chapter 3, Project Description, the 2023- 2045 General Plan proposes an approximately 24 square mile reduction to the City’s existing PA, which is shown in Figure 3 -2, in favor of a new PA that would generally match the City’s Sphere of Influence (SOI) while still including the Churn Creek Bottom community, as shown in Figure 3 -3. The prop osed project would also adjust and expand incentives for development within the City’s Opportunity Areas and Focus Areas, which are shown in Figures 3-4 and 3-5, respectively. Additionally, the proposed project also includes revisions to the existing General Plan Elements including the addition of new policies; the incorporation of the former Air Quality Element into the proposed Natural Resources Element ; and a new Community Health, Wellness and Environmental Justice Element, which are discussed further within Section 3.3.3, Changes Under the Proposed Project, in Chapter 3.
Furthermore, the proposed project and existing General Plan both have assumptions and projections for the trajectory of growth within the City over the lifetime of these respective plans. As described under “Land Use Intensity Standards” in the existing Community Development and Design Element, the buildout projections assumed under the existing General Plan are based on the holding capacity of t he vacant land within the existing PA . The existing General Plan uses an “assumed typical residential density” fo r each residential land use designation and the acreage of vacant land within the existing PA under that designation to determine an estimate of developable dwelling units and population, as seen in Table 1-2, General Plan Holding Capacity- Residential Land Uses. The existing General Plan assumed a growth projection of 126,000 residents in the Planning Area by 2020 (as described in the Introduction chapter on page 55), which when compared to the City’s 1998 population of 78,000 (as cited in the existing Community Development and Design Element), is an average annual growth rate of 2.2 percent. Under this growth rate, the PA would be expected to expand to 161,825 residents by 2045.
As described in Section 3.3.4, Forecasted Growth Under the Proposed Project, the growth projections made for the purposes of this EIR were based on the Shasta Regional Transportation Agency’s travel demand model which incorporates approved and pending projects in addition to an assumption of higher density growth within the City’s proposed Opportunity Areas. As such, the proposed General Plan’s growth projections show an average annual growth rate of 0.61 percent from 2020 to 2045, based on an existing population within the City and SOI of 117,938 to a future population in both the City and SOI of 137,377.
Packet Pg. 1580
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
ALTERNATIVES
7-8 FEBRUARY 2024
While the growth rates under both the existing General Plan and proposed General Plan are highly conservative, the 2023 -2045 generally projects a slower rate of growth over its planning horizon.
Furthermore, growth under the proposed project would be more constrained than the existing General Plan due to the reduction of the PA under the proposed project.
7.4.1 AESTHETICS
Under the No Project Alternative, the Planning Area would be developed under the current land use plan of the City’s General Plan. The City’s Municipal Code identifies development standards to ensure quality development in the City. While growth under the No Project Alternative would be subject to existing C ity policies and regulations pertaining to scenic resources, including the Scenic Highway classifications and policies in the existing General Plan, the proposed project includes goal s and policies that are more comprehensive and detailed than those in the existing General Plan. Impacts to aesthetics would be less than significant and would be the same as the proposed project.
7.4.2 AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES
Under the No Project Alternative, the Plan ning Area would be developed under the current land use plan of the City’s General Plan. Like the proposed project, the No Project Alternative would allow for conversion of Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance to nonagricultural use because the existing land use plan allows parcels that contain farmland to be developed for nonagricultural uses, as described in Chapter 5.2, Agriculture and Forestry Resources . Similarly, the existing land use plan also designates parcels with fores tland c onsists of Blue Oak Woodland, Blue Oak -Foothill Pine, Montane Hardwood, and Valley Oak Woodland land cover types (as defined in Chapter 5.2) for non -forestry uses, therefore allowing the conversion of forest land.
However, as shown in Figure 5.2 -2, Designated Farmland in the Planning Area , and Figure 5.4 -1, CalVeg Land Cover, the majority of designated farmland and forestland cover exists outside the developed core of the City on the periphery of the PA and SOI. T he proposed project would reduce the size of the PA, eliminating portions of the PA that contain designated farmland or forestland land cover . This Alternative would therefore increase the amount of land that could be converted from agricultural, or forestland when compared to the proposed project. Impacts to agriculture and forestland would remain significant and unavoidable but would be greater than the proposed project.
7.4.3 AIR QUALITY
Under the proposed project, the PA would be reduced, and future development would be more constrained than under the No Project Alternative. The proposed project would also include additional policies targeted toward the improvement and mitigation of air quality impacts through its new Community Health, Wellness, and Environmental Justice Element. Additional new policies in the Community Development and Design and Transportation Elements would also contribute to a further reduction in transportation -related emissions by prioritizing the development of low -stress walk and bikeways and encouraging mixed -use, compact development. As such the proposed project could result in fewer emissions than the No Project Packet Pg. 1581
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
ALTERNATIVES
PLACEWORKS 7-9
Alternative. However, both would allow the same of level of development intensity which would result in significant and unavoidable impacts, as analyzed within Chapter 5.3, Air Quality. While impacts under this alternative would likely be greater than those of the proposed project, they would likely also be significant and unavoidable.
7.4.4 BIOLOGICAL IMPACTS
Under the No Project Alternative, biological resources impacts would be similar to the proposed project.
The regulations protecting biological resources in the existing General Plan would be insufficient to mitigate the impacts to biological resources to a less-than-significant level. The proposed project contains a comprehensive set of goals, policies , and regulations that mitigate impacts to biological resources on a project level. However, as determined in Chapter 5.4, Biological Resources, cumulative development within the PA could contribute to the ongoing loss of undeveloped lands that support sensitive biological resources. Similarly, under the No Project Alternative, cumulative development within the existing PA could lead to the cumulative loss and displacement of wildlife , resulting in cumulatively considerable impacts .
Since most undeveloped lands in the PA are in its periphery, the proposed project could result in fewer impacts to biological resources due to the shrinking of the PA under the proposed project. Future development under this alternative, as with the proposed project, would be required to comply with local, state, and federal regulations to minimize impacts to potential sensitive natural communities. Impacts to biological resources would be significant and unavoidable and would be the same as the proposed project.
7.4.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES AND TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
Impacts under the No Project Alternative would be similar to the proposed project. Future development under this alternative and the proposed project could result in significant and unavoidable impacts to historic resources. Under the No Project Alternativ e, statutory requirements protecting cultural resources would still be in effect, but 2023-2045 General Plan policies promoting cultural resource preservation and coordination with local tribes would not be adopted. The goals, policies, and standards that pertain to the designation and preservation of archaeological resources as described in Chapter 5.4, Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources , would be enforced, which would reduce impacts to less than significant.
Additionally, compliance with California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5(b) would reduce impacts to less than significant if human remains are discovered during construction activities. Impacts under this alternative, as with the proposed project, would be less than significant.
7.4.6 ENERGY
Under the No Project Alternative, the existing Planning Area would be developed under the current land use plan of the C ity’s General Plan. Under this alternative, the PA would remain the same size an d the growth potential under the existing General Plan would be larger. As such, the proposed project could result in less vacant land on the periphery of the City’s growth boundary being developed. The development of land within the portion of the existing PA that would no longer exist within the proposed PA would be low- density and could include relatively more energy -intensive land uses like single -family subdivisions. By Packet Pg. 1582
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
ALTERNATIVES
7-10 FEBRUARY 2024
eliminating this land from the proposed PA, the proposed project would incentivize higher density development within the City core that is relatively more energy -efficient than single -family subdivisions since less land would be available for development on the periphery. Impacts under this alternative would be greater than the proposed project, though would remain would be less than significant.
7.4.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Under the No Project Alternative, the existing Planning Area would be developed under the current land use plan of the C ity’s General Plan. Under this alternative, the Planning Area would not be reduced .
Development under the No Project Alternative would be subject to the same local, State, and federal regulations as the proposed project; these regulations, as discussed in Section 5.7, Geology and Soils , as well as mitigation measures, would reduce the potential impacts to a less-than-significant level.
7.4.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Under the No Project Alternative, the existing Planning Area would be developed under the current land use plan, as with the proposed project. As discussed above under Section 7.4.3, Air Quality and Section
7.4.6, Energy, the reduction of the PA under the proposed project could result in more intensive development within the City’s core resulting in fewer transportation related emissions and more energy - efficient development. The proposed General Plan’s policies related to growth management, mobility improvements, and environmental justice would also help to reduce greenhouse gas emissions when compared to the No Project Alternative. Therefore, while impacts would be significant and unavoidable under both the proposed project and No Project Alternative, impacts would be slightly greater under this alternative.
7.4.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Under both the No Project Alternative and the proposed project, new development would be subject to local, State, and federal regulations that would reduce the potential for hazards and hazardous materials impacts. However, the proposed 2023-2045 General Plan contains new goals and policies to further reduce potentially significant impacts. As discussed above, the proposed project would reduce size of the City’s Planning Area, which would eliminate areas within the existing PA that are mapped within Fire Ha zard Severity Zones, thereby reducing the potential risk of wildfire hazards for future development. Impacts under this alternative would overall be similar to the proposed project and would be less than significant.
7.4.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
The No Project Alternative would have similar hydrology and water quality impacts as the proposed project.
Future project -specific Water Quality Management Plans would be prepared that would identify best management practices for the future project. Moreov er, low -impact development and water quality treatment solutions prescribed in project-specific Water Quality Management Plans would be designed to support or enhance the regional best management practices and efforts implemented by the C ity. Future projects would be required to comply with federal, State, and local regulations, such as the National Packet Pg. 1583
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
ALTERNATIVES
PLACEWORKS 7-11
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) and Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP).
Although development under the No Project Alternative would be subject to local, State, and federal regulations that help to address hydrology and water qualit y impacts, the additional policies and actions related to hydrology and water quality in the proposed General Plan Update would not be adopted.
Therefore, impacts would be slightly greater than the proposed project but would remain less than significant.
7.4.11 LAND USE AND PLANNING
Under the No Project Alternative, the existing Planning Area would be developed under the current land use plan of the C ity’s General Plan. The type of land uses allowed would therefore be same as that which would occur under the proposed General Plan Update. The proposed project would result in changes to the City’s existing Focus and Opportunity Areas which are areas of the City subject to specific planning efforts and guidelines focused on development and redevelopment.
Although neither the proposed project nor the No Project Alternative would physically divide existing communities within the Redding PA, the proposed General Plan Update includes new policies that would address impacts related to land use conflicts and that are not included in the existing General Plan. Impacts under this alternative would be slightly greater than the proposed project but would remain less than significant.
7.4.12 MINERAL RESOURCES
Under the No Project Alternative, the existing Planning Area would be developed under the current land use plan of the City’s General Plan. Under this alternative, the PA would not be reduced, and the City would be guided by the same goals and policies under the existing General Plan . Development under the No Project Alternative would be subject to the same local, State, and federal regulations as the proposed project; these regulations, as discussed in Section 5.12, Mineral Resources, would result in similar impacts to the proposed project and would be less than significant impacts.
7.4.13 NOISE
Under the No Project Alternative, the existing Planning Area would be developed under the current land use plan of the City’s General Plan. Development intensity under this alternative would generally be similar to the proposed project, and therefore, noise impacts would neither increase nor decrease when compared to the proposed project. Impacts under this alternative, as with the proposed project, would be significant and unavoidable.
Packet Pg. 1584
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
ALTERNATIVES
7-12 FEBRUARY 2024
7.4.14 POPULATION AND HOUSING
The No Project Alternative would not result in an increase in new residents or additional employees to the Planning Area, beyond what is forecasted in the City’s existing General Plan. As discussed above, both the existing and proposed General Plan project conservatively large growth within the Planning Area and both plans would accommodate a similar level of growth in the City . Like the proposed project, this alternative would not displace housing or people. Under both scenarios, impacts to population and housing would be less than significant. As this alternative would not achieve some of the beneficial effects of the proposed project related to housing and employme nt, the impact of this alternative would be greater than the proposed project but would remain less than significant.
7.4.15 PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION
Under the No Project Alternative, the existing Planning Area would be developed under the current land use plan of the C ity’s General Plan, similar to the proposed project . Under this alternative, the proposed project would not be adopted, which would include no revisions to the City’s Planning Area. This alternative would result in a similar level of development to the proposed project and therefore similar impacts to public services . Furthermore, the No Project Alternative would not include new General Pl an Update policies and actions that address public services and recreation. Impacts to public services, including fire, police, school, library, and parks and recreational services would be less than the proposed project and would remain less than significant.
7.4.16 TRANSPORTATION
Under the No Project Alternative, the City would continue to be developed under the existing land use plan, similar to the proposed project. However, under the proposed project, new policies would be adopted to prioritize alternative modes of transportation and implement VMT thresholds for the purposes of evaluating future project impacts. As discussed above, the proposed project would also include a reduction to the existing Planning Area potentially resulting in more compact development within the City’s core. While future VMT under the No Project Alternative was not evaluated, it can be assumed that that the proposed General Plan’s new policies and reduced Planning Area would result in less future VMT per resident when compared to the No Project Alternati ve. Impacts under this alternative would be slightly greater than the proposed project but would remain less than significant.
7.4.17 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Under the No Project Alternative, the existing Planning Area would be developed under the current land use plan, similar to the proposed project. However, a discussed above, the proposed project would include a reduction to the City’s existing Planning Area resulting in a more constrained land use pattern. As discussed in Chapter 5.17, Utilities and Service Systems, water supply is a concern for development in the Planning Area that is within the Centerville Community Services District and Bella Vista Water District service areas. These service areas include portions of the existing Planning Area that would no longe r remain in the proposed Planning Area under the propos ed project. Therefore, water supply impacts could Packet Pg. 1585
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
ALTERNATIVES
PLACEWORKS 7-13
be slightly decreased under the proposed project due since development would generally be more concentrated within the service area of the City’s water utility which has enough water to service existing and future development in its service area. Impacts to the City’s infrastructure systems would be increased under the No Project Alternative though impacts would remain less than significant.
7.4.18 WILDFIRE
Under the No Project Alternative, the Planning Area would be developed under the City’s current land use plan like the proposed project, though the proposed General Plan would include new analysis and wildfire- safety related policies that would help to ensure that wildfire impacts are mitigated to the extent possible.
The proposed project would also reduce the size of the Planning Area, as discussed in Section 7.4.9, Hazards and Hazardous Materials , and would therefore result in less development within FHSZ s. This alternative would in turn result in the potential for more development within a FHSZ when compared to the proposed project. Therefore, wildfire impacts would be increased under the No Project Alternative, but impacts would remain significant and unavoidable.
7.4.19 CONCLUSION
Impacts of the No Project Alternative would be similar for aesthetics, cultural and tribal resources, geology and soils, hydrology and water quality, mineral resources, noise, public services and recreation, and utilities and service systems . Impacts to agricultural and forestland, air quality, biological resources, energy, greenhouse gas emissions, hazards and hazardous materials, land use and planning, population and housing, public services and recreation, transportation, utilities and service systems, and wildfire would be greater than the proposed project, primarily due to the lack of adoption of new and updated policies that would better mitigate impacts and the maintaining of a larger Planning Area. The No Project Alternative would generally meet the project objectives, but to a lesser extent.
7.5 NO ANNEXATION
This alternative would reduce impacts to agriculture and forestland that would occur as the annexation and development occurs and focuses on impacts that would occur if no annexation were proposed. This alternative evaluates development only within city limits with the General Plan Update. This alternative would reduce the extension of services to allow expansion of existing land uses such as Shasta Community College and urban development of the currently unincorporated lands to the west that are classified for high density residential uses. This alternative could reduce the potential for housing near the college , and perhaps impact the ability of future college expansions that together would help reduce VMT. This alternative would include the revisions to the existing General Plan Elements including the addition of new policies; the incorporation of the former Air Quality Element into the proposed Natural Resources Element; and a new Community Health, Wellness and Environmental Justice Element. Under this alternative, no annexation would occur thereby increasing the development potential and land value of infill properties Packet Pg. 1586
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
ALTERNATIVES
7-14 FEBRUARY 2024
already within the City. As no annexation will occur this would increase pressure to build at higher densities in the City.
7.5.1 AESTHETICS
Under the No Annexation Alternative, the City would focus development within City limits . Due to the elimination of the annexable land under this alternative, potential impacts related to scenic vistas and visual character would increase as development would be focused within City limits. In addition, this alternative would change the character of the community from rural to citylike which could also cause potential impacts to the visual character of the community. To accommodate all the anticipated development within City limits, future buildings would be constructed at higher densities. The potential impact related to light and glare would reduce as development would be focused within City limits rather than in rural areas .
Impacts would be greater under this alternative for aesthetic resources compared to the proposed project but would remain less than significant.
7.5.2 AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES
Due to the substantial reduction in potential development in the Planning Area, which includes conversion of prime farmland and farmland of local importance as well as forestland (Blue Oak Woodland, Blue Oak - Foothill Pine, Montane Hardwood, and Valley Oak Woodland land cover types), under this alternative would be less than those identified for the proposed General Plan . However, as the City limits already includes prime farmland and farmland of local importance (Figure 5.2-1, Designated farmland within the City of Redding) as well as forestland (Figure 5.4-1, CalVeg – Land Cover) development would result in conversion of these resources therefore impacts would remain significant and unavailable.
7.5.3 AIR QUALITY
The No Annexation Alternative would also reduce VMT compared to the proposed project as development would be focused within City limits. However, similar to the proposed project, the No Annexation Alternative cannot be determined with a reasonable degree of certainty to not result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to the significant cumulative impact of global climate change. Therefore, air quality impacts under this alternative while less than those identified for the proposed General Plan would remain significant and unavoidable.
7.5.4 BIOLOGICAL IMPACTS
The biological impacts associated with development in the SOI were included as part of the proposed project impact analysis (See Section 5.4, Biological Resources). As this alternative includes the reduction of development within the undisturbed portion of the SOI, the potential biological resources impacts would be less than those discussed for the proposed General Plan and remain at a less –than-significant level.
However, since this alternative would remove the potential to annex for development, this alternative might put more pressure to build closer to or on key biological resources and wetlands. However, this alternative would also inherit goals and policies introduced in the General Plan Update which protects biological Packet Pg. 1587
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
ALTERNATIVES
PLACEWORKS 7-15
resources from new development. Therefore, the impact of this alternative would be less than those determined for the proposed project and remain less than significant.
7.5.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES AND TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
As the No Annexation Alternative includes the reduction of development within the SOI, fewer ground - disturbing activities would occur . The goals, policies, standards, and actions that pertain to the designation and preservation of archaeological resources as stated in the General Plan EIR would be enforced, which would reduce impacts to less than significant. Additionally, compliance with California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5(b) would reduce impacts to less than significant in the event that human remains are discovered during construction activities. Ground-disturbing activities would still occur throughout the City limits under this alternative scenario. The development anticipated in historic sections of the City that could involve historic res ources impacts would be the same under this alternative. Cultural resources impact under this alternative would be less than those identified for the proposed General Plan and remain less than significant.
7.5.6 ENERGY
The No Annexation Alternative proposes less land to be developed and therefore results in reduced energy resources. The development under this alternative would be less than the proposed project, and therefore, energy use would be reduced when compared to the proposed project. Future development within the City limits would also compliance with new CalGreen standards as well as policies in the General Plan Update, impacts under this alternative, as with the proposed project, would be less than significant.
7.5.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
The No Annexation Alternative proposes less land to be developed and, therefore, fewer construction and development activities would occur than under the proposed General Plan. With the reduction in development proposed under this alternative , fewer residents would be exposed to geologic and soils hazards. Therefore, potential geology/soils impacts under this alternative would be less than those identified for the proposed General Plan and remain at a less than significant.
7.5.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Under the No Annexation Alternative, there would be a reduction in developed land occurring compared to the proposed project. The reduction of the Planning Area under this alternative could result in more intensive development within the City’s core resulting in fewer transportation related emissions and more energy-efficient development. The proposed General Plan associated goals and policies would also help to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Therefore, while impacts would be significant and unavoidable under both the proposed project and No Annexation Alternative, impacts would be slightly less than the proposed project under this alternative.
Packet Pg. 1588
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
ALTERNATIVES
7-16 FEBRUARY 2024
7.5.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Under both the No Annexation Alternative and the proposed project, new development would be subject to local, State, and federal regulations that would reduce the potential for hazards and hazardous materials impacts. The proposed project and this alternative would result in less -than-significant impacts related to routine transport, use, or disposal or accidental release of hazardous materials; interference with an adopted emergency response plan; public health hazards from development on a known hazardous materials site; and hazardous materials near schools.
Portions of the SOI and Planning Area is in an area of Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones (VHFHSZ) and Wildland-Urban Interface (WUI) (see Figure 5.18-1, Wildland-Urban Interface Area near Redding, and Figure
5.18-2, Fire Hazard Severity Zones). The construction of fewer homes in this area, as proposed under this alternative, would significantly reduce this hazard . Therefore, potential impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials under this alternative would be less than those identified for the proposed project and would remain less than significant.
7.5.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Under the No Annexation Alternative, earth-moving activities and operational impacts would be less than the proposed project. Further, impacts on groundwater depletion or recharge, drainage pattern alteration, drainage system capacity, and change in the impervious surfaces under this alternative would be less than the proposed project because less land would be affected by development. Therefore, potential hydrology and water quality impacts under this alternative would be less than those identified for the proposed project and remain less than significant.
7.5.11 LAND USE AND PLANNING
This alternative will limit the ability of property owners within the Sphere of Influence (SOI) to develop their land within the City. Regional development pressure may encourage rural-style development in the County, which could make later expansion of the City into these areas difficult. In addition, extending services outside of the City requires separate action by the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo) and a discretionary action by the City to provide the service. In general, the policy of the City is that intensive development not occur in the SOI without annexation to ensure that all new development is consistent with City standards. While this alternative could result in pressure to build at greater intensity to accommodate growth, all development would remain consistent with the General Plan and so impacts would be similar to those identified for the proposed project and be less than significant.
7.5.12 MINERAL RESOURCES
As shown in Figure 5.12 -1, Locally Designated Mineral Resource Areas in Redding , there is one mine and land designated as Critical Mineral Resource Zone located outside City limits. However there mines and areas within City limits that have been delineated as locally -important mineral resource sites. Therefore, Packet Pg. 1589
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
ALTERNATIVES
PLACEWORKS 7-17
potential mineral resources impacts under this alternative would be the same as those identified for the proposed General Plan and remain less than significant.
7.5.13 NOISE
Under the No Annexation Alternative, the developable buildout area would be decreased compared to the proposed project, specifically within the Planning Area – not including City limits. As this alternative would significantly reduce potential development, the potential noise impacts related to established plans and noise ordinances, ground-borne vibration, and public use airports would be less than under the proposed project. Therefore, potential impacts would remain less than significant.
This alternative would result in further reduction of VMT at the City’s planning horizon forecast as development would constrained within the existing footprint of the city reducing the distance between land uses. As shorter travel lengths result in less vehicle noise, noise related to traffic would be slightly less than those identified for the proposed General Plan. Impacts would remain less than significant.
7.5.14 POPULATION AND HOUSING
Under this alternative population growth would be the same; however, the amount of land that could introduce housing would be focused in the City limits. While this alternative could result in pressure to redevelop existing neighborhoods, potentially displacing people and eliminating housing to accommodate projected growth, state law expressly requires replacement housing during the development review process. The potential population and housing impacts under this alternative would be like those identified for the proposed General Plan and would be less than significant.
7.5.15 PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION
No Annexation Alternative would reduce the amount of developable land to accommodate future growth.
Under this alternative, the reduced developable land would result in pressure on existing intrastate and recreation resources to accommodate a growing population . Therefore, potential public services and recreation resources impacts under this alternative would be greater than those outlined under the proposed General Plan. However, this alternative would also inherit the goals and policies from the General Plan Update. Therefore, impacts would remain less than significant.
7.5.16 TRANSPORTATION
This alternative would encourage infill project and higher density development within the City which would result in better VMT reduction than the proposed project. While it is possible that new development in the SOI, for example housing near Shasta College, could reduce VMT for that use and location, overall, a focus on infill would result in lower VMT in the General Plan area.
Packet Pg. 1590
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
ALTERNATIVES
7-18 FEBRUARY 2024
As land uses would be closer together and linked with improvements such as sidewalks and trails, t his alternative could generate more pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit riders than the proposed project. While the increase in development using the existing roadway network could increase delay and congestion, the overall impact would be to reduce VMT. However, any new intersections or streets would be required to be designed to City standards. Impacts to VMT would be less than those determined in this EIR for the proposed project and would remain less than significant.
7.5.17 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
This alternative would further encourage infill which will impact existing water and wastewater systems. In many cases the change of use anticipated, such as adding homes to a largely commercial area, will increase the amount of water and wastewater demand resulting in the need to upgrade or replace existing distribution and collection infrastructure such as water and wastewater lines. The demand for service will remain like that of the proposed project, however additional construction or improvement to the existing system(s) may be needed to accommodate new and different types of development in some neighborhoods. Overall, the existing infrastructure is adequate to accommodate new growth and impacts would be considered similar to those of the proposed project and less than significant.
7.5.18 WILDFIRE
The No Annexation Alternative would reduce development within fire hazardous areas . The SOI and Planning Area is located in an area of VHFHSZ and WUI (see Figure 5.18-1, Wildland-Urban Interface Area near Redding , and Figure 5.18 -2, Fire Hazard Severity Zones ). The construction of fewer homes and infrastructure in this area, as proposed under this alternative, would significantly reduce fire hazard.
Therefore, potential impacts related to exposing people and structures to fire hazards under this alternative would be less than those identified for the proposed General Plan. This alternative reduces wildfire potential (fewer people living in the VHFHSZ and WUI). As shown in Figure 5.18 -1 and 5.18 -2, there are still fire hazards potential within city limits. Therefore, impacts would remain significant and unavoidable.
7.5.19 CONCLUSION
Under this alternative, eliminating annexable land and focusing development only within the City limits would increase impacts related to aesthetic resources, land use and planning, population and housing, public services and recreation, and utilities when compared to the proposed General Plan Update. The reduction of annexable land would reduce prime agriculture and forestland conversion, biological resources, air quality, cultural resources and tribal cultural resources, energy, hydrology and water quality impacts, wildfire impacts, and vehicle trip generation and associated vehicle and GHG emissions.
Since this alternative would include the adoption of the goals, policies, and implementation actions of the proposed General Plan Update and would comply with the standard conditions and mitigation measures called out in Section 1.0, Executive Summary , of this EIR, it would generally meet the objectives of the proposed General Plan Update. Although impacts on agriculture and forestland, air quality, cultural and tribal cultural resources, GHG emissions, and wildfire would be less than those of the proposed General Packet Pg. 1591
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
ALTERNATIVES
PLACEWORKS 7-19
Plan Update, they would still be significant and unavoidable, as expected with the proposed project. The No Annexation Alternative would generally meet the project objectives, but to a lesser extent.
7.6 INCREASED INTENSITY ALTERNATIVE
The Increased Intensity Alternative the City would establish a policy that on average new development will need to be at the 90th percentile of the density range established in the General Plan. Under normal circumstances development is assumed to be in the approximate middle of the density range. For example, the State Department of Housing and Community and Development considers feasible development to be 80 percent of the density range when calculating housing potential in the Housing Element. One intent of this alternative is to encourage an efficient use of existing land thereby reducing the need to annex large areas of land. As shown in Table 7-1, Proposed Project v. Increased Intensity Scenario, the proposed project would require more land to meet the planning horizon population estimate of 137,377 persons for 2045 (See Table 3-2 in Chapter 3, Project Description). This alternative would require less land to accommodate the projected population.
TABLE 7-1 PROPOSED PROJECT V. INCREASED INTENSITY SCENARIO Residential Land Use
Classifications
Column “A”
Proposed Project (acres)
Colum “B”
90% of Density (acres) A-B Difference
1 du/5 acres (5 a/u) 30782 30782 0
1 du/1 to 5 acres (1 to 5) 32650 15237 -17413
1-2 du/acre 4008 3164 -844
2-3.5 du/acre 9250 7593 -1657
3.5-6 du/acre 437 361 -76
6-10 du/acre 456 380 -76
10-20 du/acre 185 146 -39
20-30 du/acre 0.32 0.28 -0.04
Total 77,770 57,665 -20,105
This alternative would result in more intense development, such as increased lot coverage, higher or larger buildings, within the existing land use designation s. Increased densities may further result in additional customers for transit and mixed -use projects. This alternative could change the character of the City by making it more urban than the rural /suburban nature of some neighborhoods. While land would be used more efficiently under this alternative, it could also result in the replacement of buildings in the Focus Areas and possibly change the character of some neighborhoods in the City with higher and larger buildings. This alternative would reduce VMT as more mixed use and housing would be encouraged on less land.
Under this alternative, the need for annexation would be reduced (See 7.5, No Annexation Alternative) by ensuring more development on the same amount of land , assuming it is accepted by the local housing market. While this alternative would result in a more efficient use of land with all the same benefits as the Packet Pg. 1592
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
ALTERNATIVES
7-20 FEBRUARY 2024
no annexation alternative, there may not be a market or acceptance of more intensive development within the City. This could create a demand for growth outside of the City but within the sphere of influence and beyond.
7.6.1 AESTHETICS
This alternative would be subject to the proposed project includes goals, policies, and actions that are more comprehensive and detailed than those in the existing General Plan which would reduce impacts to less than significant. It is likely that higher and larger buildings would be needed to meet the policy. The City does not currently have mid to high-rise buildings and in general most buildings are less than 5 stories. This alternative could result in higher buildings in some areas that could change the visual character of the City.
However, all new development would be subject to the policies in the General Plan, and as the alternative does not include density outside of the existing density range, impacts to aesthetics would be similar to the proposed project and be less than significant.
7.6.2 AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES
Like the proposed project, this alternative would allow for conversion of Prime Farmland to nonagricultural use because it applies nonagricultural designations on some farmlands. However, this alternative would reduce the need for annexation which would reduce the potential to convert prime agricultural/forestland resources.
The proposed project includes new policies strive to protect agricultural resources, including retaining and protecting agricultural lands through the use of proactive land use techniques and requiring that a buffer be established on property proposed for residential development to protect lands used for agricultural purposes. The prosed project’s policies would also apply to this alternative . The benefits under this alternative as opposed to the proposed project would be the reduced potential to convert agricultural and forestland (of Blue Oak Woodland, Blue Oak -Foothill Pine, Montane Hardwood, and Valley Oak Woodland land cover types) ; however, some conversion would still occur . Therefore, impacts to agriculture and forestland would be significant and unavoidable but less than the proposed project.
7.6.3 AIR QUALITY
This alternative assumes the same amount of development as the proposed project, however on less land and with more efficient development. A s this alternative promotes mixed use developments and the resultant greater pedestrian and transit uses entailed would reduce vehicle trips and associated emissions.
Therefore, air quality impacts would be reduced compared to the proposed project. While impacts under this alternative would be less than those of the proposed project, they would likely also be signific ant and unavoidable.
Packet Pg. 1593
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
ALTERNATIVES
PLACEWORKS 7-21
7.6.4 BIOLOGICAL IMPACTS
The Increased Intensity Alternative would have a reduced impact on biological resources compared to the proposed General Plan Update, since less land would be developed. Under this alternative, i ncreasing density in urban areas could lessen impacts to biological resources by avoiding expanding in rural areas and potentially impacting more habitat areas. While this alternative would likely reduce the amount of private open space around buildings, and may increase pressure to build on, or near sensitive biological resources such as riparian areas and drainages, the goals and policies in the proposed project would apply. Therefore, the impacts of this alternative would be less than those determined in the prop osed project and remain less than significant.
7.6.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES AND TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
The goals, policies, standards, and actions that pertain to the designation and preservation of archaeological resources as stated in the General Plan EIR would be enforced, which would reduce impacts to less than significant. Additionally, compliance with California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5(b) would reduce impacts to less than significant if human remains are discovered during construction activities. Ground - disturbing activities would still occur throughout the Planning Area under this altern ative scenario.
Development anticipated in the historic areas of the City would still occur under this impact therefore historic resources impacts would be the same under this alternative as the proposed project. Impacts under this alternative compared with the proposed project would be the same.
7.6.6 ENERGY
This alternative would likely result in larger buildings to accommodate the same population growth. In general, an apartment or mixed-used building uses less energy than a comparable number of single-family homes. Energy use would likely be slightly less than the proposed project but would remain less than significant.
7.6.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Under this alternative, development of urban land uses would occur, just as with the proposed General Plan Update. Impacts related to construction erosion and risks from seismic and soil hazards would occur in the same manner as anticipated for the propose d project. This alternative would involve construction of buildings or structures in the Planning Area and, as a result, potential hazards related to soils (e.g., liquefaction, soil expansion) could still occur . The overall extent of development for this a lternative would be reduced compared to the proposed project. This would result in a similar amount of earth disturbance and resultant potential soil erosion impacts. Overall, the impacts are reduced slightly, even as the significance determination would remain the same as with the proposed project.
Packet Pg. 1594
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
ALTERNATIVES
7-22 FEBRUARY 2024
7.6.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Under this alternative, more GHGs would be emitted during construction because building types would be more intense. However, as noted in Section 7.6.3, Air Quality, increased density of development under this alternative could allow for alternative modes of travel in the City, which could result in fewer GHG emissions per unit. However as noted in Section 5.8, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, although the City is considering developing and implementing a Climate Action and Resiliency Plan, it is uncertain whether these policies will lower the City’s GHG emissions to a less -than-significant level. Therefore, GHG emissions associated with the proposed project and this alternative would remain significant and unavoidable.
7.6.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Under both the Increased Intensity Alternative and the proposed project, new development would be subject to local, State, and federal regulations that would reduce the potential for hazards and hazardous materials impacts. The proposed project and this alternative would result in less -than-significant impacts related to routine transport, use, or disposal or accidental release of hazardous materials; interference with an adopted emergency response plan; public health hazards from development on a known haz ardous materials site; and hazardous materials near schools. However, this alternative could result in placing more units in VHFHSZ and WUI. However, this alternative would also benefit from the proposed project’s policies which require new development to meet fire protection standards and measures such as defensible space, street widths and grade to accommodate emergency vehicles and evacuees as well as mitigation measure set by the proposed project’s EIR would also apply. Impacts would be greater in this alternative compared to the proposed project by exposing more people and structures in these wildfire areas.
7.6.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
This alternative could result in higher intensity development potential within the Planning Area. A higher intensity (greater ground coverage) can change existing hydrology patterns. Implementation of this alternative would still involve stormwater discharges and increase impervious surfaces in urban land uses like the proposed project, but on less land. The proposed General Plan Update includes many policies to avoid adverse effects to hydrology and water quality, including a no increase in peak flow runoff policy for development projects in all drainage basins and the use of drainage systems to ensure water filtration and ongoing water quality in accordance with the City’s MS4 permit. In addition, all policies and measures that are a part of the proposed General Plan Update would be included in this alternative. This alternative also assumes that future mixed-use development would comply with standard conditions for hydrology and water quality and impacts would be less than significant. The impact of this a lternative on hydrology and water quality would be less than the impact of the proposed project and would be less than significant.
7.6.11 LAND USE AND PLANNING
This alternative would not change the land use pattern of the City but would result in more development on each land use type. Under the Increased Intensity Alternative, higher buildings would be needed in the key focus areas to allow more density. This alternative could change the character of the City by making Packet Pg. 1595
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
ALTERNATIVES
PLACEWORKS 7-23
some of the neighborhoods more urban than suburban . While land would be used more efficiently under this alternative, it could also result in redevelopment or demolition of buildings in the focus areas and changing the character of the City with larger buildings and less open space . Implementation of this alternative would result in greater land use impacts than those anticipated from the proposed project.
7.6.12 MINERAL RESOURCES
This alternative would be subject to the same local, State, and federal regulations as the proposed project; these regulations, as discussed in Section 5.12, Mineral Resources, would reduce the potential impacts to a less-than-significant level. Impacts would be the same for this alternative and the proposed project.
7.6.13 NOISE
Noise during the construction phase of development would be slightly greater than estimated for the proposed project because larger buildings can take longer to construct. However, as with the proposed project construction noise would be significant and unavoidable. Increases in vehicle noise levels would likely not be perceptible; however, due to existing high noise levels along major roadways in the City, noise impacts would remain significant and unavoidable like that of the proposed project.
7.6.14 POPULATION AND HOUSING
This alternative would increase development intensity but would not change the amount of growth projected for the proposed project. The alternative would result in a more efficient use of land that could reduce the cost of some housing types. However, as this alternative would not incre ase the amount of population or employment growth when compared to the proposed project, impacts would be less than significant.
7.6.15 PUBLIC SERVICES AND RECREATION
Increased building sizes and densities in certain areas of the City may require upgrading of infrastructure to accommodate the increase in water and wastewater demand. In general, having more intensive development would reduce response times for services and increase use of existing public facilities. While the overall impact of services would be like those of the proposed project, in some neighborhoods a substantial increase in population would create increased demand for services such as parks, without th e land needed to create new or expanded facilities. As the alternative would implement the policies of the proposed General Plan that would address the need for future services such as parks, t he impact of this alternative on public services would be like that of the proposed project and would less than significant.
7.6.16 TRANSPORTATION
Because the increase in building size would place more residents and customers close to services, this alternative would reduce vehicle miles travelled (VMT). This alternative would also result in greater congestion on area streets and intersections. The increased density would likely be directed primarily to the Packet Pg. 1596
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
ALTERNATIVES
7-24 FEBRUARY 2024
focus areas (see Figure 3 -6, Focus Areas) which are in the more developed area of the City. This could encourage mobility options rather than driving and would support the goal of reduced VMT. The impact of this alternative on transportation would be less than the impact of the proposed project and would remain than significant.
7.6.17 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Larger buildings, and those that might change existing land use could create an increased demand for utilities in some areas of the City. This could result in a need to upgrade or replace older (or smaller) water or sewer infrastructure to meet the new demand. The proposed project will also increase demand in some areas and while this alternative might result in more utility demand, the impact on services would also be less than significant.
7.6.18 WILDFIRE
The Increased Intensity Alternative would accommodate the same amount of growth as the proposed project but on less land. Under this Alternative, more units and infrastructure could also be introduced into the VHFHSZ and WUI. Consequently, growth under this alternative could increase traffic on roadways and evacuation routes potentially increasing the risk to loss of life and property in the event of a wildfire.
Development in the VHFHSZ and WUI also improve roadways and extend water into areas that may currently be undeveloped. While this introduces more people into these sensitive and hazardous areas, new developments can also improve access and water for emergency personnel. Under this alternative, impacts would be greater than the proposed project and would remain significant and unavoidable.
7.6.19 CONCLUSION
Under this alternative, increasing the development capacity throughout the Planning Area would increase impacts related to aesthetic resources, public service demands, land use and planning, noise, utility demands, and wildfire hazards when compared to the proposed General Plan Update. The reduction of acreages necessary to accommodate projected population growth and increase in land use efficiency would reduce prime agriculture and forestland conversion, air quality, biological resources, geology and soils, hydrology and water quality impacts, population and housing, vehicle trip generation and associated vehicle and GHG emissions.
The Increased Intensity Alternative would result in greater environmental impacts than the proposed General Plan Update on some environmental issues or less impacts on other issue. Since this alternative would include the adoption of the goals, policies, and implementation actions of the proposed General Plan Update and would comply with the same standards as the proposed project, it would generally meet the objectives of the proposed General Plan Update. Although impacts on agriculture and forestland resources, air quality, GHG emissions, and wildfire would be less than those of the proposed General Plan Update, they would remain significant and unavoidable, like those of the proposed project. The Increased Intensity Alternative would generally meet the project objectives.
Packet Pg. 1597
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
ALTERNATIVES
PLACEWORKS 7-25
7.7 ENVIRONMENTALLY SUPERIOR ALTERNATIVE
Table 7 -2, Alternatives Impact Comparison , summarizes the environmental impacts of each of the alternatives when compared to the proposed General Plan. The table lists the level of significance of the impacts of the proposed General Plan to each environmental topic of the Draft EIR and shows whether the impacts anticipated under each proposed alternative would be less, similar, or greater than the proposed General Plan. It should be noted that all impacts identified as being significant and unavoidable (i. e., agriculture and forest resources, air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, noise, and wildfire) would remain significant and unavoidable under each alternative despite if the alternative would reduce the intensity of the impact.
TABLE 7-2 ALTERNATIVES IMPACT COMPARISON
Impact Area Proposed
General Plan
Alternatives
No Project No Annexation Increased Intensity
Aesthetics LTS = + =
Agricultural Resources SU1 + - -
Air Quality SU2 + - -
Biological Resources SU3 = - -
Cultural Resources and Tribal
Cultural Resources SU4 = - =
Energy LTS + - -
Geology/Soils LTS = - -
Greenhouse Gas Emissions SU5 + - -
Hazards and Hazardous Materials LTS = - +
Hydrology and Water Quality LTS + - -
Land Use LTS + = +
Mineral Resources LTS = = =
Noise SU6 = - +
Population and Housing LTS + = =
Public Services LTS - + =
Transportation LTS + - -
Utilities LTS + = +
Wildfire SU7 + - +
Notes
1Impacts related to prime agriculture and forestland (of Blue Oak Woodland, Blue Oak-Foothill Pine, Montane Hardwood, and Valley Oak Woodland land cover types)
2Impacts related to cumulative impacts
3Impacts related to cumulative impacts
4Impacts related to historical resources
5Impacts related to cumulative impacts
6Impacts related to noise construction
7Impacts related to wildfire risk and cumulative impacts (+) Impacts greater than the proposed General Plan
(=) Impact similar to the proposed General Plan
(-) Impacts less than the proposed General Plan
Packet Pg. 1598
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
ALTERNATIVES
7-26 FEBRUARY 2024
In addition to comparing alternatives to the impacts of the proposed project, CEQA also requires that alternatives be evaluated against the primary project objectives. Table 7-3, Primary Objectives Alternative Comparison, notes whether the alternatives meet the primary project objectives. The increased intensity and no project alternatives largely meet all of the project objectives while still accommodating the projected growth for the City. The increase d intensity alternative may not be able to provide park and recreation opportunities throughout the community as the requirement to develop at the 90 percentile of the development range may introduce new residents in areas without the land needed to build or expand new parks. Because this may not always be the case, the determination is shown as ‘may not meet’.
TABLE 7-3 PRIMARY OBJECTIVES ALTERNATIVE COMPARISON
Primary Objective No Project No
Annexation
Increased
Intensity
Advance the City’s vision for a resilient, equitable, and healthy community with high-quality development within its urban centers and corridors.
Does not
meet Meets Meets
Maintain the existing land use classifications of the existing General Plan Diagram while addressing the use of development incentives to spur new infill development/redevelopment consistent with the existing land use classifications.
Does not
meet Meets Meets
Encourage a more compact urban form by reducing the Planning Area to a more realistic growth boundary.
Does not
meet Meets Meets
Establish thresholds and maintain roadway and intersection levels of service for the public’s health and convenience while striving to minimize increases in vehicle miles travelled from new development.
Does not
meet Meets Meets
Provide park and recreation opportunities throughout the community, including those areas where facilities and services are not available.
Does not
meet Meets May not
meet
Work with appropriate agencies and organizations to increase resident’s access to healthcare, healthy food, transportation options, public services, housing, and healthy neighborhoods.
Meets Meets Meets
In addition to the discussion and comparison of impacts of a project and alternatives, Section 15126.6 of the CEQA Guidelines requires that an “environmentally superior” alternative be selected and the reasons for such a selection disclosed. In general, t he environmentally superior alternative is the alternative that would be expected to generate the least amount of significant impacts, or which would reduce environmental impacts associated with a proposed project. The No Project/Existing General Plan unde r consideration cannot be identified as the Environmentally Superior Alternative.
The No Annexation Alternative has the least impact to the environment because it is environmentally superior alternative with regard to agriculture and forest ry resources, air quality, biological resources, cultural resources and tribal cultural resources, energy, geology and soils, greenhouse gas emissions, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, noise, transportation, and wildfire . Other impacts, including mineral resources, would have the similar impacts to the proposed project.
Packet Pg. 1599
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding) PLACEWORKS 8-1
Persons and Organizations Consulted/
List of Preparers
Bella Vista Water District
David J. Coxey - General Manager
Redding Fire Department
Jerrod Vanlandingham – Fire Chief
Redding Parks and Recreation Department
Travis Menne – Community Projects Manager
Redding Police Department
Bill Schueller – Chief of Police
Brian Cole – Captain
Brian Barner – Captain
Ron Icely – Captain
Redding Water Utility Department
Josh Watkins – Water Utility Manger
Redding Wastewater Utility Department
Josh Vandiver – Wastewater utility Manager
Redding Solid Waste Department
Paul Clemens – Deputy Director
Shasta County Public Library – Redding Library
Travis Menne – Community Projects Manager
Packet Pg. 1600
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
PERSONS AND ORGANIZATIONS CONSULTED/LIST OF PREPARERS
8-2 FEBRUA RY 2024
PLACEWORKS
Mark Teague, AICP
Principal
▪ BA, Political Science, California State University Stanislaus Lance Park
Senior Associate
▪ BA, International Relations and Affairs,
California State University, Chico
▪ Master of International Environmental Policy – Ocean and Coastal Resource Management, Middlebury Institute of
International Studies, Monterey
Jasmine A. Osman
Associate II
▪ BA Sustainability, Geography minor, San Diego State University ▪ Master of City Planning, San Diego State University
Miles Barker
Associate I
▪ BS Environmental Management and Protection,
California Polytechnic State University, Humboldt
▪ Master of City and Regional Planning,
California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo Lexie Zimny
Project Planner
▪ BS, Environmental Policy Analysis and Planning, Sustainable Environmental Design, University of California, Davis
Jessica Mendoza
Project Planner
▪ BS, Environmental Science and Management,
University of California, Davis
Payton
Planner
▪ BA, Planning, Public Policy, and Management,
University of Oregon
Abdul Khan
Project Planner
▪ BA Urban Studies, University of California, Irvine
Cary Nakama
Graphics Specialist
▪ AA Computer Graphic Design, Platt College of Computer Graphic Design
▪ BA Business Administration: Data Processing and Marketing, California State University, Long Beach
Packet Pg. 1601
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
PERSONS AND ORGANIZATIONS CONSULTED/LIST OF PREPARERS
PLACEWORKS 8-3
CONTRIBUTING EIR CONSULTANTS
▪ ECORP Consulting, Inc.
Packet Pg. 1602
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
R E D D I N G G E N E R A L P L A N U P D A T E D R A F T E I R
C I T Y O F R E D D I N G
PERSONS AND ORGANIZATIONS CONSULTED/LIST OF PREPARERS
8-4 FEBRUA RY 2024
This page intentionally left blank.
Packet Pg. 1603
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
REDDING GENERAL PLAN UPDATE FINAL EIR
CITY OF REDDING
Appendix
February 2024 B-1
Appendix B. Revised General Plan Figures
Packet Pg. 1604
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
REDDING GENERAL PLAN UPDATE FINAL EIR
CITY OF REDDING
Appendix
B-2 PlaceWorks
This page intentionally left blank.
Packet Pg. 1605
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding) §¨¦5
Airport Rd
Old
O
regon Trl
Oa
sis Rd
Lak
e Blvd
Sh
asta V
iew Dr
Hill
top Dr
Hartnell Ave
Victor Ave
Old Altu ras Rd
Clear Creek Rd
Knighton Rd
Bechelli Ln
Ca
ny
on Rd
Ch
urn Creek Rd
Keswick
Dam
Rd
Rancho Rd
E Bonnyview Rd
N Market St
Buena
ventu
ra Blv
d
S Bo
nnyview
Rd
E Cypress Ave
Court St
S Mark
et St
Placer Rd
Canb
y Rd
Dersch Rd
Park
M
arina
Dr
Hawley Rd
Churn Creek Rd
Twin
Vie
w Blvd
Eastside Rd
Alta Mesa Dr
Wes
tside
Rd
Bran stetter L
n
Dana Dr
Tex
as Springs R
d
Colle
ge Vi ew Dr
Benton Dr
Beltline
Rd
Mistle toe Ln
Girvan Rd
Airpark D r Tarmac R d
Ove
rhill Dr
Meadow View Dr
Radio Ln
Sacram ento D r
Eastside Rd
§¨¦5
Qu
artz
Hil
l R
d
Placer St
Hollow L n
§¨¦5
Eureka W
ay
Churn Creek Rd
ÄÅ273
ÄÅ273
Old
Ore
gon
Trl
Swas
ey Dr
Lower
Springs
Rd
P:\GP2020-2040\ProProjects\GeneralPlan_Update\GeneralPlan_Update.aprx 0 21
Miles CDD-1
Print Date: November 30, 2023
Planning Area and Growth Areas
I
Sphere of Influence
Redding City Limit
Planning Area
Growth Areas
Primary Growth Area
Secondary Growth Area
Packet Pg. 1606
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
REDDING GENERAL PLAN UPDATE FINAL EIR
CITY OF REDDING
Appendix
B-4 PlaceWorks
This page intentionally left blank.
Packet Pg. 1607
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding) §¨¦5
Airport Rd
Old
O
regon Trl
Oa
sis Rd
Lak
e Blvd
Sh
asta V
iew Dr
Hill
top Dr
Hartnell Ave
Victor Ave
Old Altu ras Rd
Clear Creek Rd
Knighton Rd
Bechelli Ln
Ca
ny
on Rd
Ch
urn Creek Rd
Keswick
Dam
Rd
Rancho Rd
E Bonnyview Rd
N Market St
Buena
ventu
ra Blv
d
S Bo
nnyview
Rd
E Cypress Ave
Court St
S Mark
et St
Placer Rd
Canb
y Rd
Dersch Rd
Park
M
arina
Dr
Hawley Rd
Churn Creek Rd
Twin
Vie
w Blvd
Eastside Rd
Alta Mesa Dr
Wes
tside
Rd
Bran stetter L
n
Dana Dr
Tex
as Springs R
d
Colle
ge Vie w Dr
Benton Dr
Beltline
Rd
Mistle toe Ln
Girvan Rd
Airpark Dr Tarmac R d
Ove
rhill Dr
Meadow View Dr
Radio Ln
Sacram ento D r
Eastside Rd
§¨¦5
Qu
artz
Hil
l R
d
Placer St
Hollow L n
§¨¦5
Eureka Wa
y
Churn Creek Rd
ÄÅ273
ÄÅ273
Old
Ore
gon
Trl
Swas
ey Dr
Lower S
prings R
d
W St
illwater
Creek
Sulphur
Creek
Jenny
Creek
Buckey e Creek
SaltCreek
EStillwater C
reek
Middle Creek SalmonCree k
Oregon Gulch
SulphurCreek
NewtownCreek
Canyon Hollow
Olney Cr eek
W
StillwaterCreek
Boulder Creek
CloverCreek
Clear Creek
Still
water Creek
ChurnCreek
Little
ChurnCreek
OlneyCreek
P:\GP2020-2040\ProProjects\GeneralPlan_Update\GeneralPlan_Update.aprx 0 21
Miles CDD-3
Print Date: November 22, 2023
Primary River and Creek Corridors
I
Primary Creek
Redding City Limit
Planning Area
Packet Pg. 1608
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
REDDING GENERAL PLAN UPDATE FINAL EIR
CITY OF REDDING
Appendix
B-6 PlaceWorks
This page intentionally left blank.
Packet Pg. 1609
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding) §¨¦5
Airport Rd
Old
O
regon Trl
Oa
sis Rd
Lak
e Blvd
Sha
sta V
iew Dr
Hill
top Dr
Hartnell Ave
Victor Ave
Old Altu ras Rd
Clear Creek Rd
Knighton Rd
Bechelli Ln
Can
yon Rd
Ch
urn Creek Rd
Keswick
Dam
Rd
Rancho Rd
N Market St
Buena
ventu
ra Blvd
S Bo
nnyview
Rd
E Cypress Ave
Court St
S Marke
t St
Placer Rd
Canb
y Rd
Dersch Rd
Park
M
arina
Dr
Hawley Rd
Churn Creek Rd
§¨¦5
Qu
artz
Hil
l R
d
Placer St
§¨¦5
Eureka Wa
y
Churn Creek Rd
ÄÅ273
ÄÅ273
Old
Or
ego
n T
rl
ChurnCreek
Clear C reek
StillwaterCreek
Clover
Creek
Boulder Creek
OlneyCreek
Ca ny on Hollow
Salt Creek
Sulphur Creek
NewtownCreek
W
Stillwater
Creek
Middle Cree k
Oregon Gulch
SalmonCreek
Jenny Creek
Buckeye Creek
E
StillwaterCreek
Sulphur C
reek
OlneyCreek
W Still
waterCreek
P:\GP2020-2040\ProProjects\GeneralPlan_Update\GeneralPlan_Update.aprx 0 21
Miles NR-1
Print Date: November 22, 2023
River and Creek Corridor Buffer Widths
I
Sacramento River
Secondary Tributaries
Main Tributaries
Redding City Limit Planning Area
50 foot development setback
from riparian dripline or 100 feet
from bank which ever is greater.
25 foot development setback
from riparian dripline or 50 feet
from bank which ever is greater.
Minimum 75 foot development setback
from riparian dripline or 150 feet from bank
which ever is greater.
Water orientated commercial projects in the
Cypress Avenue, Park Marina, and
Convention Center areas which may have
reduced setbacks.
Packet Pg. 1610
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
REDDING GENERAL PLAN UPDATE FINAL EIR
CITY OF REDDING
Appendix
B-8 PlaceWorks
This page intentionally left blank.
Packet Pg. 1611
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding) §¨¦5
Airport Rd
Old
O
regon Trl
Oa
sis Rd
Lak
e Blvd
Sh
asta V
iew Dr
Hill
top Dr
Hartnell Ave
Victor Ave
Old Altu ras Rd
Clear Creek Rd
Knighton Rd
Bechelli Ln
Ca
ny
on Rd
Ch
urn Creek Rd
Keswick
Dam
Rd
Rancho Rd
N Market St
Buena
ventu
ra Bl
vd
S Bo
nnyview
Rd
E Cypress Ave
Court St
S Mark
et St
Placer Rd
Canb
y Rd
Dersch Rd
Park
M
arina
Dr
Hawley Rd
Churn Creek Rd
§¨¦5
Qu
artz
Hil
l R
d
Placer St
§¨¦5
Eureka Wa
y
Churn Creek Rd
ÄÅ273
ÄÅ273
Old
Ore
gon
Trl
P:\GP2020-2040\ProProjects\GeneralPlan_Update\GeneralPlan_Update.aprx 0 21
Miles
Planning Area
Redding City Limit
City Owned Open Space
Zoning Open Space
Private Open Space Easement
NR-2
Print Date: November 30, 2023
Open Space
I
Packet Pg. 1612
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
REDDING GENERAL PLAN UPDATE FINAL EIR
CITY OF REDDING
Appendix
B-10 PlaceWorks
This page intentionally left blank.
Packet Pg. 1613
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding) §¨¦5
Airport Rd
Old
O
regon Trl
Oa
sis Rd
Lak
e Blvd
Sha
sta V
iew Dr
Hill
top Dr
Hartnell Ave
Victor Ave
Old Altu ras Rd
Clear Creek Rd
Knighton Rd
Bechelli Ln
Ca
ny
on Rd
Ch
urn Creek Rd
Keswick
Dam
Rd
Rancho Rd
N Market St
Buena
ventu
ra Blv
d
S Bo
nnyview
Rd
E Cypress Ave
Court St
S Marke
t St
Placer Rd
Canb
y Rd
Dersch Rd
Park
M
arina
Dr
Hawley Rd
Churn Creek Rd
§¨¦5
Qu
artz
Hil
l Rd
Placer St
§¨¦5
Eureka Wa
y
Churn Creek Rd
ÄÅ273
ÄÅ273
Old
Or
ego
n T
rl
P:\GP2020-2040\ProProjects\GeneralPlan_Update\GeneralPlan_Update.aprx 0 21
Miles
Redding City Limit
Planning Area
USFWS Vernal Pool Fariy Shrimp Critical Habitat
USFWS Vernal Pool Tadpool Shrimp Critical Habitat
USFWS Slender Orcutt Grass Critical Habitat
CDFW Sensitive Natural Communities
National Marine Fisheries
NR-3
Print Date: November 22, 2023
Sensitive Natural Communities in the Planning Area
I
Packet Pg. 1614
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
REDDING GENERAL PLAN UPDATE FINAL EIR
CITY OF REDDING
Appendix
B-12 PlaceWorks
This page intentionally left blank.
Packet Pg. 1615
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding) §¨¦5
Airport Rd
Old
O
regon Trl
Oa
sis Rd
Lak
e Blvd
Sha
sta V
iew Dr
Hill
top Dr
Hartnell Ave
Victor Ave
Old Altu ras Rd
Clear Creek Rd
Knighton Rd
Bechelli Ln
Ca
ny
on Rd
Ch
urn Creek Rd
Keswick
Dam
Rd
Rancho Rd
N Market St
Buena
ventu
ra Blv
d
S Bo
nnyview
Rd
E Cypress Ave
Court St
S Mark
et St
Placer Rd
Canby
Rd
Dersch Rd
Park
M
arina
Dr
Hawley Rd
Churn Creek Rd
§¨¦5
Qu
artz
Hil
l Rd
Placer St
§¨¦5
Eureka Wa
y
Churn Creek Rd
ÄÅ273
ÄÅ273
Old
Or
ego
n T
rl
P:\GP2020-2040\ProProjects\GeneralPlan_Update\GeneralPlan_Update.aprx 0 1.50.75
Miles
Main Tributaries
Secondary Tributaries
Planning Area
Sacramento River
Redding City Limit
NR-4
Print Date: November 22, 2023
Sacramento River Corridor, Streams, and Stream Segments I
Packet Pg. 1616
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
REDDING GENERAL PLAN UPDATE FINAL EIR
CITY OF REDDING
Appendix
B-14 PlaceWorks
This page intentionally left blank.
Packet Pg. 1617
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding) §¨¦5
Airport Rd
Old
O
regon Trl
Oa
sis Rd
Lak
e Blvd
Sh
asta V
iew Dr
Hill
top Dr
Hartnell Ave
Victor Ave
Old Altu ras Rd
Clear Creek Rd
Knighton Rd
Bechelli Ln
Ca
ny
on Rd
Ch
urn Creek Rd
Keswick
Dam
Rd
Rancho Rd
N Market St
Buena
ventu
ra Blv
d
S Bo
nnyview
Rd
E Cypress Ave
Court St
S Mark
et St
Placer Rd
Canby
Rd
Dersch Rd
Park
M
arina
Dr
Hawley Rd
Churn Creek Rd
§¨¦5
Qu
artz
Hil
l R
d
Placer St
§¨¦5
Eureka Wa
y
Churn Creek Rd
ÄÅ273
ÄÅ273
Old
Ore
gon
Trl
P:\GP2020-2040\ProProjects\GeneralPlan_Update\GeneralPlan_Update.aprx 0 21
Miles NR-5
Print Date: November 22, 2023
Prime Farmland
I
Prime Farmland
Planning Area
Redding City Limit
Source: NRCS. 2018
Important Farmland
Packet Pg. 1618
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
REDDING GENERAL PLAN UPDATE FINAL EIR
CITY OF REDDING
Appendix
B-16 PlaceWorks
This page intentionally left blank.
Packet Pg. 1619
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding) §¨¦5
Airport Rd
Old
O
regon Trl
Oa
sis Rd
Lak
e Blvd
Sh
asta V
iew Dr
Hill
top Dr
Hartnell Ave
Victor Ave
Old Altu ras Rd
Clear Creek Rd
Knighton Rd
Bechelli Ln
Ca
ny
on Rd
Ch
urn Creek Rd
Keswick
Dam
Rd
Rancho Rd
N Market St
Buena
ventu
ra Blv
d
S Bo
nnyview
Rd
E Cypress Ave
Court St
S Mark
et St
Placer Rd
Canb
y Rd
Dersch Rd
Park
M
arina
Dr
Hawley Rd
Churn Creek Rd
§¨¦5
Qu
artz
Hil
l R
d
Placer St
§¨¦5
Eureka Wa
y
Churn Creek Rd
ÄÅ273
ÄÅ273
Old
Ore
gon
Trl
P:\GP2020-2040\ProProjects\GeneralPlan_Update\GeneralPlan_Update.aprx 0 21
Miles R-1
Print Date: November 22, 2023
Existing and Future Parks
I
Future Parks
Existing Parks
Planning Area
Redding City Limit
Packet Pg. 1620
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
REDDING GENERAL PLAN UPDATE FINAL EIR
CITY OF REDDING
Appendix
B-18 PlaceWorks
This page intentionally left blank.
Packet Pg. 1621
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding) §¨¦5
Airport Rd
Old
O
regon Trl
Oa
sis Rd
Lak
e Blvd
Sh
asta V
iew Dr
Hill
top Dr
Hartnell Ave
Victor Ave
Old Altu ras Rd
Clear Creek Rd
Knighton Rd
Bechelli Ln
Ca
ny
on Rd
Ch
urn Creek Rd
Keswick
Dam
Rd
Rancho Rd
E Bonnyview Rd
N Market St
Buena
ventu
ra Blv
d
S Bo
nnyview
Rd
E Cypress Ave
Court St
S Mark
et St
Placer Rd
Canb
y Rd
Dersch Rd
Park
M
arina
Dr
Hawley Rd
Churn Creek Rd
Twin
Vie
w Blvd
Eastside Rd
Alta Mesa Dr
Wes
tside
Rd
Bran stetter L
n
Dana Dr
Tex
as Springs R
d
Colle
ge Vie w Dr
Benton Dr
Beltline
Rd
Mistle toe Ln
Girvan Rd
Airpark Dr Tarmac R d
Ove
rhill Dr
Meadow View Dr
Radio Ln
Sacram ento D r
Eastside Rd
§¨¦5
Qu
artz
Hil
l R
d
Placer St
Hollow L n
§¨¦5
Eureka Wa
y
Churn Creek Rd
ÄÅ273
ÄÅ273
Old
Ore
gon
Trl
Swas
ey Dr
Lower S
prings R
d
ChurnCreek
Olney Creek
Clear Creek
Boulder C
reek
Sulphur Creek
StillwaterCreek
Little
ChurnCreek
Canyon Hollow
Oregon G ulch
Clover
Creek
W
StillwaterCreek
JennyCreek
E
StillwaterCr
eekBuckeye Creek
Salt Creek
Druse C reek
Moody Creek
StillwaterCreek
Canyon Hol low
P:\GP2020-2040\ProProjects\GeneralPlan_Update\GeneralPlan_Update.aprx R-5
Print Date: November 22, 2023
Primary River and Creek Corridors
Primary Creek
Planning Area
Sacramento River
Redding City Limit
I
0 21
Miles
Packet Pg. 1622
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
REDDING GENERAL PLAN UPDATE FINAL EIR
CITY OF REDDING
Appendix
B-20 PlaceWorks
This page intentionally left blank.
Packet Pg. 1623
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding) §¨¦5
Airport Rd
Old
O
regon Trl
Oa
sis Rd
Lak
e Blvd
Sh
asta V
iew Dr
Hill
top Dr
Hartnell Ave
Victor Ave
Old Altu ras Rd
Clear Creek Rd
Knighton Rd
Bechelli Ln
Ca
ny
on Rd
Ch
urn Creek Rd
Keswick
Dam
Rd
Rancho Rd
N Market St
Buena
ventu
ra Blv
d
S Bo
nnyview
Rd
E Cypress Ave
Court St
S Mark
et St
Placer Rd
Canby
Rd
Dersch Rd
Park
M
arina
Dr
Hawley Rd
Churn Creek Rd
§¨¦5
Qu
artz
Hil
l R
d
Placer St
§¨¦5
Eureka Wa
y
Churn Creek Rd
ÄÅ273
ÄÅ273
Old
Ore
gon
Trl
P:\GP2020-2040\ProProjects\GeneralPlan_Update\GeneralPlan_Update.aprx 0 21
Miles
Planning Area Boundary
Redding City Limit
Earthquake Shaking Potential for California (rev 2016)
(% g)
Highest
Lowest
PS-1
Print Date: November 16, 2023
Ground Shaking Potential
I
Increasing Intensity
Packet Pg. 1624
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
REDDING GENERAL PLAN UPDATE FINAL EIR
CITY OF REDDING
Appendix
B-22 PlaceWorks
This page intentionally left blank.
Packet Pg. 1625
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding) §¨¦5
Airport Rd
Old
O
regon Trl
Oa
sis Rd
Lak
e Blvd
Sh
asta V
iew Dr
Hill
top Dr
Hartnell Ave
Victor Ave
Old Altu ras Rd
Clear Creek Rd
Knighton Rd
Bechelli Ln
Ca
ny
on Rd
Ch
urn Creek Rd
Keswick
Dam
Rd
Rancho Rd
N Market St
Buena
ventu
ra Blv
d
S Bo
nnyview
Rd
E Cypress Ave
Court St
S Mark
et St
Placer Rd
Canb
y Rd
Dersch Rd
Park
M
arina
Dr
Hawley Rd
Churn Creek Rd
§¨¦5
Qu
artz
Hil
l R
d
Placer St
§¨¦5
Eureka Wa
y
Churn Creek Rd
ÄÅ273
ÄÅ273
Old
Ore
gon
Trl
P:\GP2020-2040\ProProjects\GeneralPlan_Update\GeneralPlan_Update.aprx 0 21
Miles PS-2
Print Date: November 22, 2023
Liquefaction Potential
I
Planning Area
Liquefaction Potential
High Potential
Low Potential
Source: Seismic Hazards Assessment
for the City of Redding. Prepared by
Woodward-Clyde Federal Service (1995).
Packet Pg. 1626
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
REDDING GENERAL PLAN UPDATE FINAL EIR
CITY OF REDDING
Appendix
B-24 PlaceWorks
This page intentionally left blank.
Packet Pg. 1627
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding) §¨¦5
Airport Rd
Old
O
regon Trl
Oa
sis Rd
Lak
e Blvd
Sh
asta V
iew Dr
Hill
top Dr
Hartnell Ave
Victor Ave
Old Altu ras Rd
Clear Creek Rd
Knighton Rd
Bechelli Ln
Ca
ny
on Rd
Ch
urn Creek Rd
Keswick
Dam
Rd
Rancho Rd
N Market St
Buena
ventu
ra Bl
vd
S Bo
nnyview
Rd
E Cypress Ave
Court St
S Mark
et St
Placer Rd
Canb
y Rd
Dersch Rd
Park
M
arina
Dr
Hawley Rd
Churn Creek Rd
§¨¦5
Qu
artz
Hil
l R
d
Placer St
§¨¦5
Eureka Way
Churn Creek Rd
ÄÅ273
ÄÅ273
Old
Ore
gon
Trl
P:\GP2020-2040\ProProjects\GeneralPlan_Update\GeneralPlan_Update.aprx 0 21
Miles PS-3
Print Date: November 22, 2023
100-Year Floodplain
I
Sacramento River
100-Year Floodplain*
Planning Area
Redding City Limit
*This layer is a combination of the FEMA
100-year flood zone and the floodplain
produced by the Montgomery Watson
flood study (a contracted analysis).
Packet Pg. 1628
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
REDDING GENERAL PLAN UPDATE FINAL EIR
CITY OF REDDING
Appendix
B-26 PlaceWorks
This page intentionally left blank.
Packet Pg. 1629
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding) §¨¦5
Airport Rd
Old
O
regon Trl
Oa
sis Rd
Lak
e Blvd
Sh
asta V
iew Dr
Hill
top Dr
Hartnell Ave
Victor Ave
Old Altu ras Rd
Clear Creek Rd
Knighton Rd
Bechelli Ln
Ca
ny
on Rd
Ch
urn Creek Rd
Keswick
Dam
Rd
Rancho Rd
N Market St
Buena
ventu
ra Blv
d
S Bo
nnyview
Rd
E Cypress Ave
Court St
S Mark
et St
Placer Rd
Canb
y Rd
Dersch Rd
Park
M
arina
Dr
Hawley Rd
Churn Creek Rd
§¨¦5
Qu
artz
Hil
l R
d
Placer St
§¨¦5
Eureka Wa
y
Churn Creek Rd
ÄÅ273
ÄÅ273
Old
Ore
gon
Trl
P:\GP2020-2040\ProProjects\GeneralPlan_Update\GeneralPlan_Update.aprx 0 21
Miles PS-4
Print Date: November 22, 2023
Very High Fire Severity Zone
I
Planning Area
Very High Fire Severity Zone
Redding City Limit
Source: CAL FIRE
Packet Pg. 1630
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
REDDING GENERAL PLAN UPDATE FINAL EIR
CITY OF REDDING
Appendix
B-28 PlaceWorks
This page intentionally left blank.
Packet Pg. 1631
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding) §¨¦5
Airport Rd
Old
O
regon Trl
Oa
sis Rd
Lak
e Blvd
Sh
asta V
iew Dr
Hill
top Dr
Hartnell Ave
Victor Ave
Old Altu ras Rd
Clear Creek Rd
Knighton Rd
Bechelli Ln
Ca
ny
on Rd
Ch
urn Creek Rd
Keswick
Dam
Rd
Rancho Rd
N Market St
Buena
ventu
ra Blv
d
S Bo
nnyview
Rd
E Cypress Ave
Court St
S Mark
et St
Placer Rd
Canb
y Rd
Dersch Rd
Park
M
arina
Dr
Hawley Rd
Churn Creek Rd
§¨¦5
Qu
artz
Hil
l R
d
Placer St
§¨¦5
Eureka Wa
y
Churn Creek Rd
ÄÅ273
ÄÅ273
Old
Ore
gon
Trl
P:\GP2020-2040\ProProjects\GeneralPlan_Update\GeneralPlan_Update.aprx 0 21
Miles PS-5
Print Date: November 22, 2023
Flood Evacuation Routes
I
Planning Area
Evacuation Route
Redding City Limit
Packet Pg. 1632
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
REDDING GENERAL PLAN UPDATE FINAL EIR
CITY OF REDDING
Appendix
B-30 PlaceWorks
This page intentionally left blank.
Packet Pg. 1633
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding) §¨¦5
Airport Rd
Old
O
regon Trl
Oa
sis Rd
Lak
e Blvd
Sh
asta V
iew Dr
Hill
top Dr
Hartnell Ave
Victor Ave
Old Altu ras Rd
Clear Creek Rd
Knighton Rd
Bechelli Ln
Ca
ny
on Rd
Ch
urn Creek Rd
Keswick
Dam
Rd
Rancho Rd
N Market St
Buena
ventu
ra Blv
d
S Bo
nnyview
Rd
E Cypress Ave
Court St
S Mark
et St
Placer Rd
Canb
y Rd
Dersch Rd
Park
M
arina
Dr
Hawley Rd
Churn Creek Rd
§¨¦5
Qu
artz
Hil
l R
d
Placer St
§¨¦5
Eureka Wa
y
Churn Creek Rd
ÄÅ273
ÄÅ273
Old
Ore
gon
Trl
P:\GP2020-2040\ProProjects\GeneralPlan_Update\GeneralPlan_Update.aprx 0 21
Miles PS-6
Print Date: November 22, 2023
Wildfire Evacuation Routes
I
Planning Area
Redding City Limit
Evacuation Route
Packet Pg. 1634
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)
REDDING GENERAL PLAN UPDATE FINAL EIR
CITY OF REDDING
Appendix
B-32 PlaceWorks
This page intentionally left blank.
Packet Pg. 1635
Attachment: Final Environmental Impact Report (2.1--Comprehensive Update of the General Plan & Final EIR, by City of Redding)