Summary not yet generated for this topic.
Community sentiment
Related issue
Sage area rezoning proposal (GPA 240053)→At a glance
- Public comments
- 16
- Last 30 days
- 0
Discussed at 1 meeting in the last 60 days; most recently Sep 15, 2026.
Public comments (16)
An adjacent 40-acre owner spoke in support of initiating the process, arguing regional infrastructure challenges are better solved through a comprehensive project.
Board of Supervisors - Regular Meeting — September 15, 2026 · 2:19:04 →A Temecula native supported one-to-two-acre equestrian-style parcels, saying other issues can be overcome.
Board of Supervisors - Regular Meeting — September 15, 2026 · 2:18:40 →A Sage resident was okay with initiation only if public input follows, citing lack of water, sewer, fire hazard, and poor public notice to Sage's 1,300 residents.
Board of Supervisors - Regular Meeting — September 15, 2026 · 2:24:07 →Presented petitions with over 2,000 signatures opposing the rezoning, citing rural character, traffic, and wildfire evacuation risk.
Board of Supervisors - Regular Meeting — September 15, 2026 · 2:26:38 →President of the Sage Fire Safe Council disputed the county's account of the March outreach meeting and questioned whether mapped access routes are real, all-weather roads.
Board of Supervisors - Regular Meeting — September 15, 2026 · 2:30:19 →A longtime Sage community organizer described single-entry evacuation routes, water scarcity, and prior petition fights against the applicant's proposals.
Board of Supervisors - Regular Meeting — September 15, 2026 · 2:29:20 →An adjacent property owner said the area is far from any tract housing and asked the applicant to stay at five-acre parcels.
Board of Supervisors - Regular Meeting — September 15, 2026 · 2:36:44 →A Mesa Road resident said she cannot exit her driveway now, questioned density bonuses, and noted the applicant's campaign contributions warrant heightened scrutiny.
Board of Supervisors - Regular Meeting — September 15, 2026 · 2:36:26 →A lifelong Sage resident cited school capacity data and county animal shelter euthanasia rates in opposing one-acre density, saying five acres is workable.
Board of Supervisors - Regular Meeting — September 15, 2026 · 2:42:43 →A direct neighbor cited the applicant's prior Bollinger Road project's code enforcement problems, sewer infrastructure gaps, and her own wildfire evacuation experience in opposing the change.
Board of Supervisors - Regular Meeting — September 15, 2026 · 2:45:55 →A young Sage resident described repeated rescheduled meetings and shifting plans, saying he strongly opposes and wants the five-acre minimum kept.
Board of Supervisors - Regular Meeting — September 15, 2026 · 2:53:28 →A De Portola resident since 1994 noted current zoning already allows up to 160 dwellings with ADUs and cited weak sheriff and fire response times.
Board of Supervisors - Regular Meeting — September 15, 2026 · 2:56:10 →A resident on the adjacent road said the proposal is too sharp a contrast with the rural area and confirmed the March fire station meeting showed no support.
Board of Supervisors - Regular Meeting — September 15, 2026 · 2:58:32 →Argued the simplest action is no action: current zoning already allows up to roughly 80 homes plus ADUs, so no general plan amendment is needed.
Board of Supervisors - Regular Meeting — September 15, 2026 · 3:01:19 →A seven-acre resident asked to keep five-acre zoning, citing five major accidents on Mesa Road in six weeks and county traffic safety studies underway.
Board of Supervisors - Regular Meeting — September 15, 2026 · 3:03:42 →Showed the property could already be divided into 80 five-acre lots matching adjacent wine country zoning, and suggested capping any project at 80 homes.
Board of Supervisors - Regular Meeting — September 15, 2026 · 3:03:42 →