Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Green Blue Infrastructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Officials and local groups present green-and-blue infrastructure proposal for Sonoma general plan
Summary
A multi-group team presented a green-and-blue infrastructure framework to the Planning Commission proposing a citywide overlay to link parks, creeks, trees and trails into the general plan; commissioners and other boards endorsed the concept and recommended mapping and implementation steps.
The Sonoma Planning Commission received a multi-speaker presentation promoting a green-and-blue infrastructure (GBI) framework to guide updates to the city—s general plan. Presenters described the proposal as an overlay and planning approach to link parks, trails, trees, waterways and public art into a unified system mapped across the city.
Sedra Nathan, who led the presentation, described GBI as a planning approach that "weaves" green spaces (parks, tree canopies, cool corridors) and blue spaces (streams, wetlands) into the urban fabric to meet multiple goals — climate resilience, connectivity, reduced vehicle miles traveled and improved public health. Nathan said the framework is consistent with state guidance and with recently adopted local plans such as the Active Transportation Plan, which identified tree-lined routes and connectivity as community priorities.
Speakers from local commissions and organizations expanded on the framework—s practical benefits. John Donnelly (Parks, Recreation and Open Space Commission) said a mapped greenway overlay would help the commission advise on habitat restoration, parks improvements and tree canopy work. Lauren Kershner (Cultural and Fine Arts Commission) recommended pairing public art with greenway corridors to strengthen place-making and tourism. David Morell (Climate Action Commission) tied the proposal to the city—s climate goals and supported expanding tree canopy and green walkways. Caitlin Cornwall (Sonoma Ecology Center) emphasized equity, saying better trail connections would most benefit residents without private open-space access.
Presenters urged the city to perform a citywide asset audit that identifies public and private open-space assets, easements, existing trails, and corridors so the overlay can be mapped and used to prioritize grant funding and capital improvements. They proposed a flexible —toolbox— of implementation measures (green streets, bioswales, canopy plantings, wayfinding and art installations) that could be adapted over time rather than locked into static code.
Commissioners and staff responded positively. Several commissioners called the proposal an opportunity to codify the elements that residents already value and to integrate multiple city objectives — climate action, mobility, urban forest management, arts and parks — into a single planning framework. Staff said the concept could be incorporated into the evolving general plan; staff also noted the approach dovetails with projects already underway, including a forthcoming city tree-canopy inventory and the Active Transportation Plan.
Commissioners asked for next steps: mapping existing assets, defining overlay boundaries (staff mentioned Civil Code and state guidance that can be used to define a greenway overlay), creating a project —toolbox— for implementation, and coordinating with other commissions and community groups on funding and priorities.
No action was required; presenters and commissioners characterized the session as educational and recommended further study and formal mapping during the general-plan update.
