The development of a upscale gun club and clubhouse along the Sonoma Baylands will move forward after an appeal to halt the development was denied by the County’s Board of Zoning Adjustments. The 3-2 vote in support of Kenwood Investment’s Wing and Barrel Ranch sends the project to the Board of Supervisors.
The hearing drew a large, divided crowd on November 16 to hear the future of the self-described “ultimate private hunting club” on Hwy 37 just east of the Hwy 121 intersection.
Though pro-gun advocates spoke in passionate defense of the project, Commissioner Paula Cook, District 3, clarified that the base issue “is not about the operator’s hopes or plans but rather a use that runs with the land, in perpetuity.” Public comments in favor of the appeal spoke largely to environmental and land-use concerns.
According to Blake Hillegas of PRMD, the project proposes a lot line adjustment to remove 89 acres from Land Conservation Act status, through a parcel exchange, creating the site for the 26,800 sq ft private membership clubhouse, 1.5 acre casting pond, 85 ft sporting clay shooting tower and other amenities. Remaining on the site is an 8,500 sq ft clubhouse, present home of Black Point Sports Club (BPSC), which would continue in use by the public on Mondays and Tuesdays.
Hillegas said the proposed land use is consistent with the General Plan, is satisfactory with regard to traffic and circulation, and does not unduly restrict public access. Though he acknowledged that the Wing and Barrel Ranch website indicates “lots more activity” than the applicant’s stated limit of 40 people per day, Hillegas made a staff recommendation to deny the appeal.
Commissioner Greg Carr (District 1, including the Sonoma Valley) opened board comment with a sharp rebuke to PRMD. “I am baffled how (the initial proposal) was ever issued a Conditional Use Permit without public hearings. I couldn’t believe it.”
Commissioner Paula Cook, District 3, complained that there had been inadequate time to study the lengthy staff report, issued only three days prior. “I felt like a blind reader tasked with understanding it.” The proposal looks like a far larger operation than alleged, and asked for pinpointing details of events to be held on the site, she said.
Bill Hooper, representing Kenwood Investments, outlined the planned construction and operation, asserting that club activities are all compatible with agriculture. He acknowledged that the website presents another view, and that “we have toned it down.” He said the club will be limited to 500 memberships. “Our model for business is dues driven; we have kicked it up a notch to make a possible business model.”
One of the appellants, Sue Smith, a rancher on neighboring property, noted that she was not opposed to hunting. Her issue is with the accelerated scale of the proposal.
Norman Gilroy, a local farmer, called the business model Hooper mentioned “the monetization of a simple hunt club, a $50 million asset.” He said the applicant has been “piecemealing” since the first proposal made in 2014, and that the scale has gone up to “an unconscionable level. All the uncontrollable loose ends can spiral out of control”
Most of the public comment in favor of the project focused on the importance of the modest Black Point Gun Club, the project’s predecessor, in the lives of its longterm members. The 50-year old club moved to the 1,000-acre hay farm when it was forced to relocate for public trust wetlands expansion. Kennel manager Mike Sutsos said that his father started the gun club in 1964 and this is “a lot about tradition and future generations being able to use the property.”
Members of the pro-hunting contingent, some local, some from Santa Rosa and Novato, had clearly been coached and organized. Each wore a matching printed label bearing one of four mottos, “Preserve Western Heritage” and “Save Our Land” among them.
They spoke to the moral values inculcated by the outdoors hunting experience with their fathers or grandfathers at the club, and expressed their hope of transmitting these values to their children. Some rebutted arguments not made by any appellant supporter, such as “they call us killers.”
The sincere expressions of support for an old-fashioned gun club seemed in sharp contrast with the experiences described on the Wing and Barrel Club website, such as a new clubhouse that is “ outwardly luxurious and magnificent,” a place to enjoy “Legendary menus …and unparalleled world-class wines”.
Public comment for the appellants focused on flooding, especially with high tide; the instability of wetlands for a major building; sea level rise on Hwy 37; ground water draw-down; and traffic safety. Ted Eliot noted that 75 percent of voters approved the Open Space that saves Baylands, and that three major environmental groups oppose this project.
The sincere expressions of support for an old-fashioned gun club seemed in sharp contrast with the experiences described on the Wing and Barrel Club website, such as a new clubhouse that is “ outwardly luxurious and magnificent,” a place to enjoy “legendary menus … and unparalleled world-class wines”.
Commissioner Carr expressed that the big issue is what will be the true use of the building now and in the future. He proposed conditions be added: cut back evening hours; no entry/egress during peak traffic hours; easement or restriction on property to prevent other future development; no special events among others.
Davis and Lamberson ultimately voted to uphold the appeal, while Cook, Reed and Carr supported the project with the added conditions, by denying the appeal. At press time, no minutes of the marathon meeting were available, nor was a clarified statement of the conditions added to the proposal before the vote.
Above image from Kenwoodinvestments.com
“ outwardly luxurious and magnificent,” a place to enjoy “Legendary menus …and unparalleled world-class wines”. Now let’s see who on the board of supervisors OKs this thing and who says no. This will weed out who is really for the ruling class who is for the rest of us.