Safeway San Francisco closing Webster

California. No non-grocery posts.
ClownLoach
Valued Contributor
Valued Contributor
Posts: 2992
Joined: April 4th, 2016, 10:55 pm
Has thanked: 50 times
Been thanked: 309 times
Status: Offline

Re: Safeway San Francisco closing Webster

Post by ClownLoach »

buckguy wrote: January 24th, 2024, 4:57 am
storewanderer wrote: January 24th, 2024, 12:30 am
HCal wrote: January 24th, 2024, 12:20 am

It doesn't even need to be limited to redevelopment of a grocery store. All new housing developments over a certain size should be required to include a grocery store if there is not already one within a certain distance.

This could be treated just like affordable housing. In California, it is very common for cities to waive certain building requirements if the development contains some quota of "affordable" units. Just add in a grocery store as part of that.
What would the "certain distance" be? There are already multiple supermarkets within a mile or so of this closing Safeway. But they really are about a mile away... this large Safeway has done a good job being a central "supermarket" for a rather wide radius of area.

Also would they allow Trader Joe's to meet the definition of a supermarket?

One of the closest stores to this was a Bell at 1336 Post Street. This was about the nicest of the Bell Stores, and even had a pharmacy added in a major remodel Ralphs did to it in 2001. This was the only Cala/Bell Store with a pharmacy. It closed before Ralphs NorCal as a whole closed and has been vacant ever since. The Ralphs interior is still there. It did very little business. I had heard it was going to become a Target, but that probably won't be happening now.

It is a lot easier for a developer to set aside some units as 'affordable' (major emphasis added) than force a grocery store in. Also what if the site is doomed for a grocery store (like 1336 Post that has sat vacant for 15+ years) once the site is built? No grocer can make it in the space for whatever reason. At that point they'd have been better off with additional 'affordable' (again emphasis major emphasis added) units.
Safeway has a lot of experience going into residential projects and replacing old stores as part of multi-use complexes. There have been two replacement locations in the DC area that fell through because the neighborhoods didn't like the scale of Safeway's plans. Still, they've replaced at least two stores in the last decade and opened an entirely new location doing this in the city and they've opened at least on suburban location like this.
Safeway had a lot of experience going into mixed use complexes when they operated their own development company. They no longer have that division. Having said that, they most likely still have the key personnel in the Real Estate department who could reassemble such an operation with proper funding. Most big chains with the success of Safeway retain these people as they are the keepers of the "secret recipes" just as Coca-Cola and KFC keep their recipes in a vault... To the extent of some companies issuing lifetime contracts. They do not let these people go as they understand the trade secret policies that ultimately make these companies what they are. I have wondered if this is one of the reasons Kroger is interested in the merger as they collectively will control billions of dollars of very valuable real estate on the West Coast and need to develop solid strategies so they retain control over their own destiny as much as possible.
Post Reply