The unveiling of the City of Sonoma’s General Plan on Oct. 4 was usurped by an 11th-hour appeal by Safeway’s supermarket’s attorneys.
The planning commission had intended to rezone Safeway’s 3-acre empty lot from commercial to residential. Commissioners deferred the final decision to the council, and the ensuing debate took up most of the meeting.
Todd Paradis, a Safeway real estate executive, opened by stating: “We believe we have a lot of common ground with the city. We foresee adding more parking and expanding our retail area in the near future.”
Affordable housing advocate Sam DiGiacomo countered by pointing to a recent Santa Rosa Press Democrat article that showcased a Santa Rosa Safeway which built low-income units on adjacent property. DiGiacomo felt the piece “underscored that a commercial venture and affordable housing can be a win-win situation.”
Paradis feared that if the city changed land-use designation from commercial to housing it would put Safeway into nonactivity mode: “If you changed it, we would be in a position of having to come back to the city and have it zoned commercial to improve our building.”
That was confirmed by Sonoma City Planner Dave Goodison.
At that point, council member Joanne Sanders asked for a tally of properties that could be used for low-cost housing. It was found that even without the Safeway property the city would be in compliance with ABAG, the Association of Bay Area Governments. In addition, because of a city ordinance already in place, if Safeway did want to expand, the city could require some housing as stipulated by the ordinance.
Before a final vote, impacts of such an expansion were discussed. What most of the council seemed to agree on was that increased traffic at Fifth Street West and West Napa Street, where Safeway is located, is not desirable. The recent pedestrian death was mentioned which led to more questions about how development might further exacerbate the situation. Paradis tested the idea of adding up to 50 more spaces at right angles and implementing two-way traffic. That received a passionate response from Barnett, who said the same configuration in the Sonoma Market lot to be a “near disaster.”
“I can tell you that model does not excite me in the least and I have seen people narrowly avoid backing into each other,” said Barnett.
Paradis conceded to further reviewing the possibilities for increased parking: “I am reasonably sure that we will be able to figure out something that makes everyone happy to some degree.”
The discussion closed by the council voting 5-0 to keep Safeway’s commercial zoning.
