Email
PrintPlanning Commission nixes Peet’s
PEET’S COFFEE AND TEA applied to open a store at 591 Broadway, but the plan was nixed by the Sonoma Planning Commission.
Robbi Pengelly/Index-Tribune
In a test of the city’s new formula store ordinance, which allows “chain” businesses to be located off the Plaza, the Sonoma Planning Commission voted 4-3 Thursday to deny an application by Peet’s Coffee and Tea to occupy a vacant office building on Broadway.
Citing vehicle and pedestrian traffic concerns, intensity of use and possible loss of revenue for nearby coffee establishments, Commissioners Michael George, Robert Felder, Gary Edwards and Mark Heneveld voted to deny the use permit now required for formula stores in the Historic District. The ordinance went into effect on July 18.
The business was being proposed by Chris Konecny, representing Peet’s; and Henry Mayo, who has owned the building since 1972. It is located on a commercially-zoned parcel at 591 Broadway and is on the southwest corner of Broadway and McDonell streets, next to 599 Thai Cafe and across from Sonoma Ballet.
Speaking against the project was Dave Mock, owner of Hot Shots, a coffee business two blocks south of the project. He said it was not a coincidence that Peet’s would locate near his establishment, and charged that they can afford to force local shops out of business, even if it means taking a loss in the process. “If we allow chains, we are just another town,” said Mock.
Brian Mayo, representing the building owner, said Mott’s business was different. It has a drive through and an indoor sandwich shop. The proposed coffee establishment will have neither. “People’s habits are changing,” he said. “Coffee is popular. There is room for both.”
Commissioners Chip Roberson and Matthew Tippell had concerns about traffic, and had proposed a continuance until a traffic study could be provided. The motion was defeated. City staff, who stated they are not traffic engineers, based their traffic count on the eighth edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineers, which claims that coffee shops generate peak traffic of 94 vehicle trips between 4 and 6 p.m. Konecny disputed the count, claiming peak business is early in the morning. “We get 12 to 15 customers per hour, on the average, over a ten hour period,” he said. “The majority of our business is before 11 a.m. Twenty percent is pedestrian traffic.”
Commissioner Edwards was concerned about pedestrians crossing Broadway, particularly in the early hours of the morning. While parking met the standard, he was also concerned that it might not be enough. Commissioner George said his foremost concern was that the business would not be locally owned and operated, and revenue would not remain and be circulated in the community. “There is also the balance sheet issue,” he said. “Big businesses can lose money until the competitor is out of business. I don’t want to put local businesses out of business.”
Commissioner Heneveld concurred with the statements about economics, but said his main concern is parking and pedestrian traffic. Felder said his major issue was the “cumulative impacts” of intensifying uses, plus he didn’t think the project met the findings. To receive approval for a use permit, the project must enhance the diversity of the business mix and be consistent with the historic character of Sonoma. The staff report stated that those findings could be made as there are a wide variety of businesses in the area and the applicants were not proposing to modify the exterior of the building.
The applicants are considering an appeal.
Please note: Your full name will be published with your comment.
The Planning Commission has seriously and inexcusably over-reached. Your role is not social engineering. I am all for strong government, but this is over the top.
All of the objections are clearly bogus. Is starbucks not a chain? It is in the city limits. Local businesses that have quality products and service will survive - those that don't won't. There is no free enterprise in Sonoma. The case about traffic is absurd - that has been out of control for the last 3 decades..
So a cafe two blocks away from the Plaza will cause traffic and pedestrian issues, but a gargantuan hotel taking up a whole block on the Plaza is cool? Hmmm. That's weird.
I find the "rules" very confusing. Massage Envy and Ben and Jerry's are both chains and smack on the square. Don't you think a place that offers cheap facials and massage by people making low therapist wages tarnishes the value of what Sonoma offers and drove places like Camille's day spa out? Or Ben and Jerry's hasn't affected the Chocolate Cow and the feel of the town's charm? Why are those places allowed and not others. I agree there shouldn't be chains on the square but the Peets proposal is off the square. And I like the people that work at hot shots but I also don't agree with all their practices as they pushed out an employee who decided to leave their church. It seems like there is a lot of hypocrisy and all about who you know to push things through.
I agree that the decision to deny Peet's a permit is based on unfounded reasons. Looking around town, there are plenty examples of franchise businesses, even on the Plaza... Massage Envy and Ben and Jerry's. Staples was allowed to open, Starbucks and Blockbuster too. Was there the same concern regarding local businesses, who offer similiar services in those cases? Of course not! Peet's brings quality to Sonoma, jobs and business taxes. Peet's quality coffee adds to Sonoma's reputation as a foodie tourist destination. Peet's is to fine coffee as Grand Crus and Reserves are to fine wine. We have been wishing for a Peet's coffee in Sonoma for a long time. It appears the commission made a very poor decision. There will be a backlash because most Sonoma residents yearn for great coffee.
"Traffic" -- not chain vs. mom & pop -- is the 21st century reality Sonoma must come to terms with if it is serious about expanding jobs, tax revenues and filling the thousands of square feet of empty offices & commercial buildings.
No one likes traffic -- not pedestrians crossing wide boulevards like Broadway and Napa Street or the four corners of the Plaza, nor the drivers interminably waiting for them. That Highway 12 cuts through the heart of the business/Plaza district is a curse on small-town charm but a blessing for the Chamber of Commerce.
Sonoma needs a master traffic plan because Money comes here in motor vehicles, not by fax or beamed down from the starship Enterprise. Tourists, local customers & employees -- and their money -- all arrive in motor vehicles. EVERY business -- chain or mom & pop local -- intends to be wildly successful, not a failure. More success = more tourists & customers = more traffic.
But if the amount of traffic generated is too often a deal-breaker for a new business -- local or chain -- then Sonoma has put a cap on its economy that has nothing to do with the "charm vs chain" issue.
The City should come to terms with how it is going to deal with traffic. No or limited economic growth might very well be what the majority of residents want, and there would be nothing wrong with that. But residents should know that such is the choice being made each time the planning commission nixes a new business because it will generate "too much traffic."
Traffic planning in Sonoma is now haphazard and "ad hoc." If Sonoma intends to grow its economy, it needs a comprehensive traffic plan that includes parking garages, one-way streets & pedestrian over/underpasses -- all of which can be tastefully incorporated into, & co-exist with, small-town 19th century quaintness and pedestrian charm.