The City of Sonoma expects to meet all its low income housing needs with

just one development

--20269 Broadway, South Sonoma--


To concentrate all of Sonoma's low income housing on one small lot, when it has till 2023 to find more sites, seems merely expedient and not well thought out. 


The City Council and the Planning Commission published a document in September 2014 called the "2015-2023 Housing Element Update." On Page 8, it states the City of Sonoma has adequate sites to address RHNA (Regional Housing Needs Allocation). As you can see below, 47 very low and low-income units will meet Sonoma's target. Forty-nine units are planned for 20269 Broadway. As we show throughout this website, a high-density housing project is ill conceived for this site given its location near the Lodge at Sonoma, Train Town, and residential neighborhoods. Read the entire report


Mixed-income housing is a better choice, according to HUD


Sonoma needs housing for Seniors


"The Housing Update" repeatedly mentions the lack of affordable housing for seniors, yet the 20269 Broadway project does not address this most pressing need. Why not?


There are set-asides for veterans and accommodations for families; why are seniors not in this mix?


Concentrated poverty

The proposed site use for high density low and extremely low income housing on one site location is against good planning practice for the City of Sonoma and could destroy the "small scale country town" sense of place. 


HUD favors mixed-income housing to avoid concentrated poverty. In contrast, SAHA, the County, and the City are planning a large high-density development. Report can be found here


"A recent Brookings Institution analysis concludes that concentrated poverty has five wide-ranging impacts: It limits educational opportunity for children, leads to increased crime rates and poor health outcomes, hinders wealth building, reduces private-sector investment, increases prices for goods and services, and raises costs for local governments."


It appears the concentration of all low and extremely low income housing needs on one site is a discriminatory practice and should be re-evaluated.