8 ms·

From an urban planning perspective the typical big box build of 100,000 sqft of box with 30 acres of parking lot is a disaster. I don't think retrofitting them

From an urban planning perspective the typical big box build of 100,000 sqft of box with 30 acres of parking lot is a disaster. I don't think retrofitting them is the correct answer. I've always felt that big boxes should have to put their demolition cost up as a surety bond before construction. Should the store close or go out of business the land could be returned to a field.

maxerickson 10y ago
The problem is that they are often willing to ignore an area until they get the concessions they want. Vibrant areas might be able to get the store to do what they want, but they aren't the areas that are going to have a problem when it leaves.
- st3v3r 10y ago
  That's why such a provision would have to be enshrined in law.
  - maxerickson 10y ago
    If the business can get adjacent jurisdictions to compete for the new store, it might not matter whether such a rule is enshrined in existing law or not. When I envision the big boxes around here, it's mildly unfortunate that they might end up unused, but there is so much open space that they aren't a particularly big concern. By area, most of the US is like that. In areas where there isn't a whole lot of open space, the redevelopment will be more likely anyway.
  - dpark 10y ago
    Unless you mean state or federal law, that won't do anything, because "The problem is that they are often willing to ignore an area until they get the concessions they want." Wal-Mart will just not build in SmallTown, Arkansas if they have to spend twice as much as in LittleTown, Arkansas 5 miles down the road. SmallTown can put whatever requirements they want into the law. Wal-Mart just won't build there until they change the law. Of course, whether SmallTown should want Wal-Mart is a valid question. Unfortunately, they probably do, because Wal-Mart moving into LittleTown will probably decimate the local retail economy anyway.
spraak 10y ago
This succinctly sums up my feelings, thank you.

maxerickson 10y ago

The problem is that they are often willing to ignore an area until they get the concessions they want. Vibrant areas might be able to get the store to do what they want, but they aren't the areas that are going to have a problem when it leaves.

st3v3r 10y ago
That's why such a provision would have to be enshrined in law.
- maxerickson 10y ago
  If the business can get adjacent jurisdictions to compete for the new store, it might not matter whether such a rule is enshrined in existing law or not. When I envision the big boxes around here, it's mildly unfortunate that they might end up unused, but there is so much open space that they aren't a particularly big concern. By area, most of the US is like that. In areas where there isn't a whole lot of open space, the redevelopment will be more likely anyway.
- dpark 10y ago
  Unless you mean state or federal law, that won't do anything, because "The problem is that they are often willing to ignore an area until they get the concessions they want." Wal-Mart will just not build in SmallTown, Arkansas if they have to spend twice as much as in LittleTown, Arkansas 5 miles down the road. SmallTown can put whatever requirements they want into the law. Wal-Mart just won't build there until they change the law. Of course, whether SmallTown should want Wal-Mart is a valid question. Unfortunately, they probably do, because Wal-Mart moving into LittleTown will probably decimate the local retail economy anyway.

spraak 10y ago

This succinctly sums up my feelings, thank you.