Coalition Opposing New Gas Stations (CONGAS)
Santa Rosa Planning Commission votes down what could be the last proposal for a new gas station in Sonoma County – ever
Santa Rosa – On Thursday, April 10, the Santa Rosa Planning Commission voted 6-0 with one Commissioner recused, to deny a Conditional Use Permit for a gas station that would have been built at 874 North Wright Road, at the western edge of Santa Rosa where highway 12 and Fulton/Wright roads intersect.
A strong showing of over 20 concerned neighbors, healthcare professionals, bicycling enthusiasts, members of the Coalition Opposing New Gas Stations (CONGAS) and others attended and spoke to share concerns including the fact that the site is a seasonal wetland (see photo), is adjacent to the Joe Rodota Trail, and is at an address where more than ten gas stations already operate within a five-mile radius. Several speakers also pointed to the fact that Santa Rosa adopted a climate emergency resolution in 2020 and imposed a permanent ban on new gas stations in 2022 and that we Santa Rosa should not be permitting new gas stations in 2025.
This proposal at 874 N. Wright Rd. was exempted from the ban on new gas stations and was still under consideration by permitting authorities because it was already “in the pipeline” with a complete permit application already filed when the ban was imposed.
The reason this may be the very last proposal for a new gas station in Sonoma County is that between 2021 and 2023 Sonoma County and six cities in the county adopted ordinances permanently prohibiting new gas stations. Only three cities have not taken the action: Cloverdale, Healdsburg, and the City of Sonoma. Each of them have stated that there is little to no chance that a new gas station will be proposed within their boundaries. So, with no other live proposals for a new gas station in Sonoma County, the last gas station to be built in the County has likely already been built.
“Gas stations are LULUs,” said Woody Hastings, co-coordinator of the Coalition Opposing New Gas Stations (CONGAS), the all-volunteer group engaged on the gas station issue. “Locally undesirable land uses. We tolerated them throughout the 20th century and into the 21st, but with the rise of the climate crisis and practical alternatives to gasoline, the time has come to question the wisdom of continuing to build new fossil fuel infrastructure. In fact, we must rapidly phase out fossil fuel production and use if we want to have a livable planet,” he stated.
Healthcare professionals opposed to the project point to toxic pollution that threatens public health and safety. “Evidence continues to build that even minor exposure to compounds found in gasoline can be harmful to public health,” stated Gary Pace, MD, a Sonoma County-based family physician. “For example, adverse health effects of even tiny amounts of exposure to benzene include cancer, childhood leukemia, anemia, increased susceptibility to infections, and low birthweight babies.” Dr. Pace was one of 18 Sonoma County based healthcare professionals signed on to a letter of opposition to the project.
Bicycling community leaders said that a gas station adjacent to the Joe Rodota Trail is not something cyclists want to see. “I’ve heard the developer has claimed that bicyclists will appreciate the gas station as an opportunity for a break and a snack. This is not the first time that someone who has never before expressed concern for cyclists’ needs has made a spurious claim that their project will somehow benefit us. The reality is that vehicles exiting and entering a gas station at this location will be CROSSING THE ACTUAL TRAIL, creating a safety hazard for cyclists and pedestrians,” said Eris Weaver, Executive Director of the Sonoma County Bicycle Coalition.
Environmental representatives including the Sierra Club and Sonoma County Conservation Action said that the location is a greenfield with seasonal wetlands. Local residents were concerned about leaks and spills polluting groundwater supplies and impacting local wells. Others mentioned concern about traffic at this already busy intersection with increased traffic congestion, noise, and idling cars. CONGAS representatives and others also pointed out that the site is adjacent to a propane vehicle fueling station with large above-ground fuel tanks and that it is against city rules to build two fueling stations within 500 feet of each other.
Each Commissioner stated that they were unable to find that the project would not be injurious to public health and well-being, a requirement under Conditional Use Permit rules and cast their votes to deny the project. This could be the final fate of the proposal that first emerged nearly 20 years ago in 2006. The applicant has 10 days to file an appeal. If no appeal is filed, the case is closed.