After watching last week’s city council and planning meetings, I started to wonder about ‘the green dot’ discussion. We have to remember the 69th & Cliff Walmart site was voted down, the city had a meeting with Walmart staff and sent them to 85th & Minnesota because of the land use designation on the 2035 plan and the “green dot.”
I was able to get 3 maps from the ‘Save our Neighborhood’ group that are not available on the city’s website.
The first map would be the orange multi-family residential designation on Twin Eagle. The reason this is important is the city intended that area to be a transition zone from single family residential to commercial at 85th & Minnesota.
The second map shows all of the single family NOT multi-family residential homes that ended up being built before 12-7-2009. I have since learned that all but 12 were there before that date.
Why is that important?
The third map answers that question, the green dot on 85th & Minnesota was decided on that date when that intersection became a sub-regional employment center. The problem is that with the new WM proposal that doesn’t leave enough room to properly transition from single family residential to the highest commercial use allowed in the city of Sioux Falls, C-4 commercial.
This will hopefully start to answer the “what were people thinking” question and the “what did they expect would be at that intersection?” question. The green dot didn’t exist until 12-7-2009 when almost all of the current homes out there had already been built. We would expect either a neighborhood or community employment center like 57th & Western, 69th and Minnesota, or even like 57th & Cliff, but not like 41st and Louise which is being proposed.
The city clearly made a mistake in 2009. They also made a mistake removing the citizen input from the conditional use process on Shape Places and now they are gearing up a misinformation campaign against that neighborhood (something the city directors are very good at). Except this time they have a planning staff that is clearly bitter over Shape Places being revoked and a city attorney that either doesn’t know what he is talking about, or is twisting the zoning rules to fit Walmart’s agenda. The problem the city has this time is that they are not going up against an army of retired people who want snowgates or outdoor pools. They are fighting a group that consists of several lawyers and professionals that have done their research and are prepared to fight this until the end.
So what came first? The Residents or Walmart? I think we know the very clear answer.
I’m a bit confused at what the “Save Our Neighborhood” group is trying to sell here. They might claim the orange section is intended to indicate multi-family, but Stencil was selling lots out there as single family homes prior to 2009, and single family homes were being built on those lots prior to 2006/2007.
Heck – I can give you an example of one of those lots being sold to a builder who won an award during the Parade of Homes in spring 2007 – the home itself was built in 2006 and it wasn’t the first home out there at the time.
The entire area was staked out as single family lots and Stencil was building single family homes out there from the start. If they made promises to homeowners about what would come South of 85th then by all means call them on it… but it wouldn’t be the first time Stencil made promises they couldn’t keep.
So is their point that it was supposed to be multi-family? If so, why did they buy homes there knowing it wasn’t?
I feel the need to repeat this as the “SON” group seems to be confused – there is nothing in city laws or codes that REQUIRES a buffer between single family residences and commercial property. Yes they do try to create such buffers by lining developments with twin homes and apartments, but it is not REQUIRED. There are dozens of situations all around Sioux Falls where single family homes but right up against commercial property.
I know, I know… commercial property is one thing, Walmart is another. The problem is, we need to make decisions based upon zoning and not based upon the party that wishes to build. If you are comfortable with a strip mall or Target or Hy-Vee, or a mega-Sanford complex… then you have no right to complain about Wallyworld.
Overall Craig…well said.
Walmart can do whatever they want. The city has criteria they can’t enforce because the courts will not hear them. Residents in the area will become revoke Home Rule advocates once they realize the hard way that city government is not democracy. If it were my land I’d mine it for pink granite with thousand foot side walls. At some point people must realize there is no way to stop the city, developers, or your neighbors from any type of construction or normally unacceptable activity.
Based on the data presented, the city is not telling the whole story as usual. WallyWorld shows up and is willing to pay a sizeable excise / sales tax so let’s bend over for it. If we screw over the citizens, their little brains won’t catch on in time to stop us.
Something is not right and I applaud the petitioners.
I wrote Walmart a letter advising them to ignore the city. It’s foolish to have citizens upset and the council setting amended unenforceable standards. Even the mayor must agree with Walmart. He spends our taxes and is dictator for unenforceable policy but with present city code 2-66 Walmart can build where & how they please. If you don’t like it, sell here for what you can get and move to Brandon. Sioux Falls city limits could become condemned and good for National Guard target practice.
Even when the city complies with SD Supreme Court 08-2478, there must be test cases and legal history. It could be years before city government works for citizens. Best recourse is for the state to revoke the city charter so that anything from that date forward becomes policy and rule of law.
Lewis Southeast on Sycamore has single family housing on two sides. On the south side, where trucks unload, is right across the street from single family. The new Shape Places ordinance was trying to make buffers, but that was a bad idea according to SON.
And I think somebody Photoshopped that map. Why would you have multifamily dwelling 3 blocks off 85th in a cul-de-sac? I know someone who lives in Golden Eagle Court. There are some really nice homes there. And he could really GAS if Walmart builds out there.
Still missing the simple point here.
The residents were first and were promised to keep it this way.
http://www.keloland.com/newsdetail.cfm/the-power-lot-appeal/?id=149191
SlewFoot, I started out pretty pissed off at the Save Our Neighborhood group (I still may be). I always thought they were a bunch of fat cats that thought they were better than WalMart, but what if the above information is true?
Where I am having a hard time disagreeing with them is with the fact that citizens should have a say in the development process. The current zoning ordinances allow for that input, the new ordinances which were referred did not. So to that end, I see why they did what they did.
I’m starting to agree with Testor, something is just not adding up here.
Slewfoot, I started out pretty pissed off at the Save Our Neighborhood group (I still may be). I looked at them at first as a bunch of white-collar whiners, but what if the above information is true?
Where I am having a hard time disagreeing with them is that they have said numerous times citizens should have a say in the development process, especially when it involves your neighborhood. The old zoning ordinances allow for that input, the new ordinances do not. To that end, I agree with what they have done in referring Shape Places.
I am starting to agree with Testor in that something is just not adding up. The city can find a better location for this store like it did on the north-side.
Sorry for the repeat messages, thought my first one got deleted. =)
The issue here isn’t that citizens want input. The issue here is that a bunch of controlling, upper middle class suburbanites want to use “citizen input” as a guise to support an outmoded, opaque land use system that encourages arbitrary decisions based on what rights to use your property your neighbor thinks you should be allowed to have. The fewer instances of conditional use the better, because it means you have transparency on the front side of the development equation.
Craig’s exactly right. These people have all kinds of distorted, convoluted beliefs about what their “rights” are and aren’t. They wrongly assume that land use plans are set in stone, they wrong confuse suggestions with legal requirements, they wrongly interpret what may be preferred for what is required, they wrongly interpret state law on who has legal standing to challenge a zoning change. Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong.
Now, I get our host is on some kind of perpetual crusade to bash developers and big business, and hey, it’s his blog so that’s just fine. But that said, these homeowners aren’t owed a thing. If he thinks that giant block of orange land is what is normally and customarily expected in terms of a buffer between single-family and commercial, I could find a thousand urban planners to laugh him out of the room.
Finally, to the extent any alleged “promise” exists, no legislative or executive body is bound to anything “promised” by a previous legislative or executive body. Things change all the time. That’s life.
I look forward to shopping at our new Walmart. I’ll use the self-serve checkouts so people can b@#$% about it not employing more people, and when I’m done, I’ll hang a right on Audie and gun my engine through their subdivision.
Zamby wonders about Walmart shoppers
Richie Rich does not approve of a Wallyworld in his neighborhood! It could bring the wrong kind of folk down to their neighborhoods and slow down the drive to the golf course! Only tanning salons or trendy liquor stores will do!
The link to Keloland just took me straight to their home page. I tried to search their archive and cannot find the item. Did they delete the article?
Although I do believe with the argument that they were there first and promised as such, I also have to agree with Craig is the real problem here is it is a Wal-Mart. It is that simple. I know multiple people back in this area and more than once I have heard – if this was going to be a Target – I don’t think we would care as much. I am sure that would go along with a development such as Dawley Farms. At some point – it is going to be developed.
Their biggest problem is the guy in the corner office of 9th and Dakota. He wants one more thing on his resume and he doesn’t care what he has to do to get that accomplished.
L3wis: “The residents were first and were promised to keep it this way.”
A few points to that… number one being first doesn’t mean a thing. The first to purchase the land and the first to navigate the laws and zoning ordinances might get them somewhere, but simply being the first development in the area is meaningless. Besides – how far back do we go? Landscape Garden Center was there “first” and they are zoned commercial. Do they get a say who their neighbors will be?
Next, who ‘promised’ them that the land South of 85th would be mixed-use or multi-family? Was it the same people who promised those areas North of 85th would be a “buffer” even though they were platted for single family homes?
So let’s pretend for a second that the city proposed that area would be mixed-use and/or multifamily. Great – but as with all things related to future growth and development, things can and do change. At one point we were told a second Sam’s Club was going to be installed at Dawley Farm. We were also supposed to have a second Best Buy and a Dick’s Sporting Goods out there. But none of those happened, because the economy tanked, priorities changed, and companies opted to shift strategy.
So even if a proposal did exist, it really doesn’t matter. The zoning will allow for a big box store – and the site location is ideal for one regardless of what a few homeowners on Audie happen to think.
I can guarantee that no “promise” was ever made. I challenge anyone who is part of the SON group to produce a written document where they were promised that wouldn’t be a commercial development.
It is once again worth noting that the developer (Stencil) may have made claims and promises – but if that is the case they need to go back and complain to Stencil (get in line… there is a reason they no longer are involved with large developments in the area).
I can’t help but wonder why people in that area ignored all the warning signs. Did they really think they could just take someone’s word for it? Did they really feel that nobody would ever propose a commercial development on that land? Did they really think there would be some nice upper end twinhomes lining 85th and Minnesota to act as a buffer between their homes and future strip malls, apartments, and commercial development?
If so, shouldn’t they be blaming the person in the mirror for being naive?
Mark my words – Walmart is coming and they will win in any legal challenge that takes place. My advice to people in the area is if they feel it will have a drastic, negative impact upon their neighborhood, I’d advise them to sell now. That said – aside from half a dozen homes that are on Audie… I doubt there will be any significant impact to the majority of the neighborhood as the negatives will be offset by the convenience of a five minute walk to a major retailer and grocery store (which will probably end up with a gas station addition eventually).
So yea if my name was Schwan I’d be really upset, but she chose to build on a very busy corner with a potential unknown across the street… so I have a hard time being sympathetic (and I won’t even mention the other issues with that location and home).
“Richie Rich does not approve of a Wallyworld in his neighborhood!”
I don’t think it really has anything to do with the economic status of the residents. This is about making this a multi-retail space that fits the neighborhood instead ANOTHER Walmart that eats up everything around them.
I ask the question, “Do we really need another Walmart?” Let’s be frank here. Why is this location important to Walmart, two reasons really, they will attract shoppers from Harrisburg and Canton, and secondly they will get the taxpayers to provide them the utilities, road upgrades, etc. I think the main reason why they never built in Harrisburg, is because they didn’t have anything $$$ to offer Walmart.
As for documentation, I think it is all pretty clear above that the city made a mistake in 2009 to define this area.
No we don’t “need” another Walmart. Heck I don’t even “want” another Walmart because I know that as much as they brag about low prices, they can actually be a drain on the taxpayer as we subsidize their low wages with social benefits to their average worker such as SNAP benefits (food stamps), housing assistance, Medicaid benefits and so on.
If you’re interested, there was recent a great article in Forbes on this very subject: http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2013/06/03/california-to-wal-mart-enough-no-more-taxpayer-subsidized-profits-for-you/
That said – I don’t shop there and obviously I’m in the minority. Most people love their Walmarts, and most people will gladly shop there after the doors are open. Most of these people will admit they want a Walmart, and some will even claim we need it.
Of course those living in Twin Eagle are quick to claim they don’t want Walmart, but what they are really saying is “we don’t want Walmart near us… build it a mile away and we will be happy to spend money there”.
By the way – there is a meeting with the Mayor on the 15th for the SON group to ask questions and attempt to swap opinion. Bring lawnchairs…and popcorn. Lots and lots of popcorn.
http://saveourneighborhood.info/
An open meeting? If so – I am shocked. Huether won’t have the opportunity to throw one of his shit fits behind closed doors where people are wondering “did we really elect this guy?” With that – get ready for A LOT of smoke and mirrors. This Wal-Mart is happening and if people do not believe that – they have no idea what really does happen behind closed doors.
I am a little surprised it is an open meeting also. I should see if Bonita will let me climb up on her roof with water balloons so everytime Huether says, ‘Good Job’, ‘Frostbite’, or ‘God’ I can drop a balloon on him.
If 85th and Minnesota area is so important, why not move south a little bit and be on the south side of SD100?
Researching the maps will yield much information. As long as we are planning a new state highway and at the same time annex the quarter section of land to allow Walmart to piss off the locals, let’s just annex a little more land to the south?
It’s going to happen, so let’s make it happen. Minnesota Ave is scheduled to to be extended 4 lane anyway, why not help regional shopping center on the other side of SD100?
Oh yea, I forgot to ask who owns the property on the south side of SD100. Maybe Lloyd doesn’t control it…
I find it interesting on strategy that if the South side Walmart is held up, the North side Walmart (where people genuinely want one) will also be held at a standstill.
I live in the region, am not a “Richie Rich” by any means, and don’t shop at Walmart, nor intend to if they do wind up building out here. Costco, on the other hand, will be happy to drive to.
Basic idea about LAND USE law – it is permissive in nature, not restrictive. So – if something is zoned for multi-family residential – that simply means that such a use is one that is PERMITTED on that property – not required. There is no restriction against the use of multi-family zoned property for single-family development.
Okay. So your point is?
Very valid point rufus – which is why the map showing multi-family as a potential option is nothing more than a distraction.
Testor: “if 85th and Minnesota area is so important, why not move south a little bit and be on the south side of SD100?”
You are talking about moving almost a Mile farther South – that may not seem like a long distance, but in terms of retail that is lightyears away.
Let me repeat what I’ve said several times on these Walmart topics. Walmart is not stupid – they are VERY good at this, and they have no desire to be out in the sticks where development will occur in five to eight years. They want to be on the edge where development will surround them within a year and where their customer base won’t be able to stop at a Lewis or a Hy-Vee that is 10 blocks closer and more convenient.
Putting Walmart South of SD100 (which won’t even exist for a few years) is essentially asking them to buy the land and sit on it for a few years, because there simply isn’t the population that far out to support a store today. Harrisburg might like it, but Harrisburg isn’t large enough to support such a store.
Think about what exists farther North – you have a Lewis on 41st directly across from Ace. You have Hy-Vee a few blocks farther North. You have a ShopKo a few blocks East of that and a new Costco going in that same area.
Walmart competes with all of these stores – and someone in the area of 57th and Minnesota (and all of the residential areas surrounding it) will be just as close to those stores as they are to a Walmart on 85th. Yet you push a Walmart a half mile or full mile South what happens? Suddenly they become more of a trek – they are less convenient. People start thinking they are “all the way in Harrisburg” and they complain about having to drive nearly to Canton to get their made in China products.
It is all about target market and perception. Again – in retail terms pushing them more than a few blocks South changes EVERYTHING.
I should also note that I’ve yet to hear anyone from SON suggest Walmart moves two blocks South to allow for a buffer of some sort. Truth is they don’t seem to want Walmart anywhere near them – and one of them was actually quoted as saying he feels they should build at 85th and Cliff instead. So apparently Walmart is fine provided it isn’t in their neighborhood or within their sight line. Classy.
Putting Walmart south of the nonexistent HWY 100 would only put it a few 100 feet further south. You can see a narrow white strip of land east of MN and north of 85th on the Shape Place map that was left for HWY 100. The backside of the present property the city annexed butts up against the planned HWY 100. Walmart would not want something further south anyway. Being at the intersection of a future major, busy intersection is a much better place. The other 3 corners of that intersection were zoned C-4 in the old plan.
Certainly not the expert on this that other posters are, but since the Heat were getting killed tonight, thought I would post a few thoughts.
Craig, a mile south of 85th and Minnesota and you’re now at the intersection of 115 and 106.
The other side of SD100 is much closer to 85th and Minnesota than that and actually sounds like a reasonable idea. Curious to know what the SON group would say about that option?
The Walmart on the north side of town where I live is north of our residential development by a considerable margin and I’m pretty sure it’s not considered “light years” away in terms of its retail location.
It will definitely be more than a year before that location is surrounded by development out there to say the least.
Why isn’t anyone looking at 106 and Louise Ave.?
It is still near SD100 and I-29, the city spent a lot of money to make improvements to S. Louise until about a quarter mile from 106, there are cornfields on 3 of the 4 corners down there and no schools nearby for people to complain about. Seems to make a lot more sense to me.
106 and Louise – massive infrastructure requirements (sewer lift station – or extension several miles to the East). And how do you imagine THAT would be paid for? Another hot topic of the whining class – a TIF.
DL – my point is that being zoned for multifamily doesn’t mean squat as to what type of residential any developer might have decided to build there (Stencil – high-end single family – built in multi-family zone).
If we are to believe the master plan for the south area, there are still open areas within the close proximity. If we as a city are going to be developing major highways, why not get ahead of the game a bit and get it done. If we are going to encourage sprawl, let’s plan the sprawl proactive and not reactive.
The east side of Minnesota, south of SD100 puts a Walmart type development property within easy reach of the town residents and ‘out of towns’.
Why is this not discussed? Craig Lloyd probably does not control the land, so why consider it?
rufusx,
Re: necessary improvements at 106 & Louise, from what I can see with the plan at 85th & Minnesota, won’t massive infrastructure improvements be necessary there as well?
It has been a while, but the last time I was on 85th St. between Cliff and Minnesota that was still a gravel road. Is that paved now?
Either way, so long as you have to make all kinds of improvements as it is, you may as well put the store where it makes sense and you don’t have problems.
Then again, that would be asking for smart government…a rare bird these days.
I love how people think they know a better location for Walmart than Walmart does.
Do you people think they just threw a bin at a map and said “yea that should work”? Nope – they have hundreds of employees dedicated to planning their stores. They consult with dozens of different city, county, and state departments and planners as well as local architects, surveyors, and developers before a plan is even proposed.
Their first option was shot down by residents and the city council, so they opted for their second choice. If you think they want to build 1/4 mile farther South, or on an entirely different street, or in a different part of town you are simply wrong.
Walmart choose 85th and Minnesota because it fits their model for success. It is still conveniently located for a larger number of residents (and yes Walmart uses charts that tell them exactly how many people are within X distance from their stores). It is an area that will see a vast amount of growth in the next five years. It is an area that is not in direct conflict with their existing stores nor does it have to currently worry about competition from other retailers in the area.
Some of you act as if they should build in a the middle of a cornfield and just wait 10 or 15 years until the city happens to surround it. Sorry – Walmart isn’t stupid and they aren’t going to wait around for others to come to them… they come to their customers.
The North side store has several other advantages which aren’t impacting the South side store. First, it has Interstate access from both I-29 (via 60th / Hwy 38) and via the new Marion interchange from I-90.
They also have a rapidly growing University system with thousands of students and faculty across the road. They have the communities of Hartford, Dell Rapids, and Crooks which will treat it as their primary big box store due to proximity, and they have rapidly growing residential areas that will find it much more convenient than the alternative of heading to the Louise Ave store.
Again – Walmart knows a lot more about this than any of us. Second guessing their locations is much like claiming Frank Lloyd Wright would have been more successful if he would have designed cars instead of buildings.
Craig I agree with you on most points you bring up. I also know the city ‘planners’ have special arrangements with special developers in this town. If Walmart wants to get the south side store the want, they have to work with the person who has the inside track.
That person who has the inside track is Lloyd and Lloyd had the options on the development land now being pushed.
If Lloyd had the inside track on the land located on the east side of
Minnesota Ave, south of potential SD100, guess where it would be built? Walmart would not have cared if they were on the east or west side of the street, north or south of SD100. It is within the placement they were looking for when Lloyd sold them on the idea of 85th and Minnesota.
It goes back to the insider getting to do what he wants to make millions of dollars at the expense of the ‘powerless’.
“Walmart would not have cared if they were on the east or west side of the street, north or south of SD100.”
I strongly disagree. You might have a point about East or West side of the intersection although they didn’t really have a choice since Soo Sports already had the East side (and Walmart isn’t a fan of building behind other businesses because they want the visibility and access of a main roadway).
However when it comes to North and South, Walmart cares very, very much. moving South a block may not make a significant difference, but moving 1/4 mile or more would. You also need to look at availability of land farther South – there are landowners down there that still farm and have zero desire to sell because they can’t find land nearby – and some of them know full well after SD100 is built their land will be much more valuable. Some of that land may not change hands until the current owners reach retirement age. You also have a few low areas that could cause potential issues if they are considered protected wetlands.
Also, Minnesota turns into a traditional two lane highway a few blocks South of 85th. Sure it will be widened when SD100 comes in, but when will that happen? It won’t be happening this year – and parts of SD100 are depending upon future funding, so do we really know when it will be “done”?
I get the feeling people think SD100 will be done in 2014 or 2015. In reality, it is a phased approach with some portions not really being improved and expanded until after 2030.
Read this for detail: http://www.siouxfallsmpo.org/documents/MPO/Planning_Documents/2035LRTP_Amendment.pdf
So Walmart isn’t going to be content waiting a decade until the roads are improved – they wish to build now in an area that is developed and developing – not further South where development will need to creep up to them separated by cornfields.
It has nothing to do with Lloyd, because if it was another developer like Dunham I’m sure people would have the same complaints. There are only so many developers in the area who handle projects this size – but I’m fairly certain Walmart would be more than happy to work with anyone who has a proven track record (and you can count the number of local ‘big’ developers with a proven track record on one hand even if you lost a digit or two in a nasty M-80 accident back in ’81).