Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Commissioners weigh industrial zoning changes: contractors’ yards, solar farms, bottling and bulk water distribution

June 18, 2025 | Siskiyou County, California


This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »

Commissioners weigh industrial zoning changes: contractors’ yards, solar farms, bottling and bulk water distribution
SISKIYOU COUNTY — The commission reviewed possible updates to industrial zoning, focusing on where contractor yards, solar farms, storage facilities, bottling operations and bulk water distribution should be allowed.

Staff said many applicants ask where they can put contractor yards and solar farms; limited industrial districts currently restrict many outdoor uses while heavy industrial allows the broadest set of activities. “When we work with applicants too, we typically … recommend the rezone to heavy just because it’s a wider net,” a planning staff member said.

A separate conversation centered on bottling works and bulk water distribution. Commissioners and staff drew a distinction between (1) a bottling operation that packages and pallets a product for sale and (2) bulk water extraction where water is pumped into tanks and transported offsite for distribution. One commissioner suggested that concentrated loading and unloading and frequent truck traffic for distribution should be reviewed the same way an industrial distribution center would be reviewed and proposed a conditional use permit for that activity. “If what I’m hearing … they are looking … the activity of transporting water from location A to location X should require a use permit,” a commissioner said.

Staff and commissioners noted legal and regulatory complexity: groundwater rights and state water‑law jurisdiction affect whether well owners can sell water, and those water‑rights questions are addressed through groundwater sustainability agencies and state regulators rather than the county zoning code. Planning staff recommended focusing the code on the zoning‑appropriate location and the activity’s impacts (traffic, dust, noise, on‑site loading) rather than trying to adjudicate water rights.

Commissioners also discussed allowing small animal hospitals by right in commercial districts and clarifying greenhouse versus hoop‑house definitions. No formal amendments or votes were taken; staff will consider the commission’s comments when drafting zoning code text and potential EIR scope items.

View the Full Meeting & All Its Details

This article offers just a summary. Unlock complete video, transcripts, and insights as a Founder Member.

Watch full, unedited meeting videos
Search every word spoken in unlimited transcripts
AI summaries & real-time alerts (all government levels)
Permanent access to expanding government content
Access Full Meeting

30-day money-back guarantee

Sponsors

Proudly supported by sponsors who keep California articles free in 2025

Scribe from Workplace AI
Scribe from Workplace AI
Family Portal
Family Portal