veteran+ wrote: ↑January 15th, 2024, 8:47 am
I'm not sure about the politics but I would not be surprised if that was in the mix.
There were many meetings held for input from the neighborhoods that would be affected (according to friends of mine who lived there).
Sounds like the Westwood Neighborhood Council held meetings. The neighborhood councils in LA are advisory bodies with no power to do anything; essentially busybodies who think they are important and like to hear themselves talk. Sometimes the city government will consult with them, but from what I can tell, the Ralphs expansion didn't need any government approval, so these meetings were probably just informational.
(I wonder if we should move the Westwood Ralphs posts into a separate thread at this point)?
It seems reasonable to keep it open until the plans for the land are completely firmed up. Basically keep it open until the last possible second it can be open.
Now whether or not the city will approve the redevelopment on the land site without a grocery store there remains to be seen.
Alpha8472 wrote: ↑January 22nd, 2024, 11:48 pm
Surely they could come up with a compromise. Perhaps a Safeway on the ground floor of the new building, parking garage below, and a discount on rent.
There seem to be article comments on "some other grocer."
The city could perhaps pass an ordinance requiring any redevelopment of a grocery store, to require a comparable sized grocery store as part of the redevelopment.
I do not see any assurance Safeway plans to continue with this location long term. Just that they are not closing yet.
Alpha8472 wrote: ↑January 22nd, 2024, 11:48 pm
Surely they could come up with a compromise. Perhaps a Safeway on the ground floor of the new building, parking garage below, and a discount on rent.
There seem to be article comments on "some other grocer."
The city could perhaps pass an ordinance requiring any redevelopment of a grocery store, to require a comparable sized grocery store as part of the redevelopment.
I do not see any assurance Safeway plans to continue with this location long term. Just that they are not closing yet.
That would probably be vehemently contested by politically connected developers. It would also be opposed by Safeway, as it would potentially be catastrophic to their financial situation. Remember that the company gets to book the value of the property as an asset on the books, and in turn borrow against that asset as part of the company's portfolio. I am sure that such a ordinance would lower the value of these properties as it would now limit the reuse options.
Would it be right for the people of San Francisco and all the other places becoming food deserts because of these redevelopments? Absolutely.
Alpha8472 wrote: ↑January 22nd, 2024, 11:48 pm
Surely they could come up with a compromise. Perhaps a Safeway on the ground floor of the new building, parking garage below, and a discount on rent.
There seem to be article comments on "some other grocer."
The city could perhaps pass an ordinance requiring any redevelopment of a grocery store, to require a comparable sized grocery store as part of the redevelopment.
I do not see any assurance Safeway plans to continue with this location long term. Just that they are not closing yet.
That would probably be vehemently contested by politically connected developers. It would also be opposed by Safeway, as it would potentially be catastrophic to their financial situation. Remember that the company gets to book the value of the property as an asset on the books, and in turn borrow against that asset as part of the company's portfolio. I am sure that such a ordinance would lower the value of these properties as it would now limit the reuse options.
Would it be right for the people of San Francisco and all the other places becoming food deserts because of these redevelopments? Absolutely.
I put that suggestion out there but it doesn't mean I support such a suggestion. Just put it out there for consideration. Because in order to make that work the city would probably have to agree to subsidize the store in some cases too. And once they started that suddenly every new store would need to be subsidized (even though most probably really don't need it and are profitable on their own).
storewanderer wrote: ↑January 22nd, 2024, 11:57 pm
The city could perhaps pass an ordinance requiring any redevelopment of a grocery store, to require a comparable sized grocery store as part of the redevelopment.
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.
storewanderer wrote: ↑January 22nd, 2024, 11:57 pm
The city could perhaps pass an ordinance requiring any redevelopment of a grocery store, to require a comparable sized grocery store as part of the redevelopment.
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.
storewanderer wrote: ↑January 22nd, 2024, 11:57 pm
The city could perhaps pass an ordinance requiring any redevelopment of a grocery store, to require a comparable sized grocery store as part of the redevelopment.
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.
The density of neighborhoods varies and can change over time, esp. in a built up area of a city. It would be too wonky to come up with a metric for "distance" and it could become obsolete in a short period of time You also would have to define what constitutes a grocery store. Trader Joe's went in near the Fisherman's Wharf store and apparently will open near this more recent Safeway that closed. Would that be sufficient? TJ's probably fits a tourist trappy area like Fisherman's Wharf, although people who live in nearby residential areas might disagree.
There are simpler things that can be done like incentivising ground floor retail--even if you only get a specialty markets or service businesses, it's useful because it creates pedestrian traffic on the street and creates an environment conducive to more retail over time. Otherwise, high rise residential tends to create dead zones. SF has very active civic organizations and they also can be a catalyst if they have their act together. We have a Whole Foods nearby because the local association neighborhood association did some fairly basic research and lobbied the company.
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.
