09-21-2007, 01:44 PM
Very good point Rob, and there is no answer to this. There never had been one and probably never will be. Wal-Mart won several suits based on why groceries are specifically singled out versus other dissimilar products. How much difference is it really between a discount retailer adding groceries versus the examples I gave Jade? One can argue that it's secretly an anti- Wal-Mart Super Center issue. One can argue that it's a size issue. One can argue it’s about mom & pop killer stores. One can argue that it’s about disproportionate sales tax revenue. One can argue that it's an overall community impact issue. And, one can argue that it’s to prevent the SuperFerry from traveling over speed bumps on cinder streets to avoid lava and keep the Coqui’s where they are and prevent the spread of Nulla-Walla-Tee-Doo Flies. It all amount to the same thing. Nobody really knows what and why. So, it opens the governing body up to all sorts of expensive legal challenges and gives people absolutely anything they want in the way of a reson.
There is a legitimate concern over size. The average full service grocery store can be nearing 90,000 sq. feet. The same for the average discount retailer. But when they combine both, they will need to exceed the 100,000 sq. foot benchmark. Now if anyone can remember what happens when a supermarket or big retailer closes, those stores can remain empty for some time, or the developer is forced to spend big money to divide it up into more salable/leaseable space. Now, take one of the Smitty's or Fry's Market Places that closed and you have a store almost twice as large as a normal supermarket or retail store and it can sit for a decade vacant. I don't want to single out Wal-Mart but they compounded the problem because they try to own the property or have exclusive lease rights. So when they close a normal center because they opened up a Super Center across the street. They will refuse to rent, lease or sell that property to anyone for anything that will compete with or dilute their exclusive draw power. Now you have an empty store producing zip for tax revenue to the community. I hope that the powers that be that have the finial thumbs up or down on Wall-Mart Super Center's lease, have the sense to require them that if they do close the existing store that they can not sit on it to prevent competition.
So, until someone can really explain what’s going on and why, the problems with dealing with this subject on the mainland will come barreling to the BI.
There is a legitimate concern over size. The average full service grocery store can be nearing 90,000 sq. feet. The same for the average discount retailer. But when they combine both, they will need to exceed the 100,000 sq. foot benchmark. Now if anyone can remember what happens when a supermarket or big retailer closes, those stores can remain empty for some time, or the developer is forced to spend big money to divide it up into more salable/leaseable space. Now, take one of the Smitty's or Fry's Market Places that closed and you have a store almost twice as large as a normal supermarket or retail store and it can sit for a decade vacant. I don't want to single out Wal-Mart but they compounded the problem because they try to own the property or have exclusive lease rights. So when they close a normal center because they opened up a Super Center across the street. They will refuse to rent, lease or sell that property to anyone for anything that will compete with or dilute their exclusive draw power. Now you have an empty store producing zip for tax revenue to the community. I hope that the powers that be that have the finial thumbs up or down on Wall-Mart Super Center's lease, have the sense to require them that if they do close the existing store that they can not sit on it to prevent competition.
So, until someone can really explain what’s going on and why, the problems with dealing with this subject on the mainland will come barreling to the BI.