Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the General Plan Public Comment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Neighbor voices concern over broad reclassification of Sebastiani Winery property in public comment
Summary
A resident told the Sonoma City Planning Commission she and neighbors are frustrated that the draft general‑plan language reclassifying the Sebastiani Winery property to a broad "Sonoma mixed‑use" category does not reflect prior concerns about density, fire risk and preserving agricultural and park space.
SONOMA CITY — During the public‑comment period at the April 17 Planning Commission meeting, Becky Sager of Wilking Way urged commissioners to reconsider a proposed broad reclassification of the Sebastiani Winery property in the draft general plan.
Sager said she and nearby residents are not opposed to development but are alarmed that the current draft uses a broad Sonoma mixed‑use designation that, in her view, no longer limits commercial uses to visitor‑oriented activities and now lists housing as “high‑density.” She urged the city to retain agricultural and park space and to reconsider housing density across the property because of wildfire evacuation and congestion concerns.
"We really need somebody to say, 'Hey, we're hearing you and this is what we think,'" Sager said during public comment. She referenced a Sonoma area fire evacuation study and the recent Cal Fire reclassification of properties, which she said increased the area’s wildfire hazard designation.
Why it matters: The comment reflects neighborhood concern that broad land‑use categories in a general plan draft could enable higher‑density housing and expanded commercial uses on a large property adjacent to established residences. The issues raised — evacuation capacity, fire‑risk mapping and compatibility of new uses with open space — intersect with public‑safety, traffic and long‑term planning choices that will be addressed in later steps of the general‑plan process.
What the speaker asked for: Sager asked the commission to "reconsider the blanket reclassification of this land, that you keep the agriculture and the park space that already exists, and that you reconsider the density of the housing." She asked for clarity about how residents can find out whether the city is considering their suggestions and what the next opportunities for input would be.
Staff and process notes: The public comment occurred during the non‑agenda public comment period; no formal action on the general plan or the Sebastiani parcel was taken at the April 17 meeting. City staff later noted in the meeting that the general plan process will include additional elements, studies (including a safety/evacuation study) and public comment opportunities. The director said comments are being collected and will be part of the draft elements and environmental review when they are prepared.
Next steps for residents: City staff said the general plan drafting process will generate draft elements and environmental analyses that will be released for public review; additional public comment opportunities will follow while code amendments and implementing regulations are developed. The commission’s role at this stage is to review agenda items; further policy direction on the general plan would follow staff analysis and formal public hearings.
