Today’s hearing (Room 4B – Minnehaha CC)Â before Judge Tiede will largely hinge on this statute;
SDCL 9-4-5.   Annexation of unplatted territory subject to approval by county commissioners. No such resolution describing unplatted territory therein may be adopted until it has been approved by the board of county commissioners of the county wherein such unplatted territory is situate. For the purposes of this section, unplatted territory is any land which has not been platted by a duly recorded plat or any agricultural land as defined in § 10-6-31.Source: SDC 1939, § 45.2906 as added by SL 1955, ch 215, § 1; SL 1982, ch 71, § 1.
While I’m no attorney, this statute seems pretty black and white that the land at 85th & Minnesota, which is clearly in Lincoln County, was not platted and was not approved by the Lincoln County commissioners before it was annexed by the city of Sioux Falls. This also goes back to my numerous blog posts about how the city attorney’s office thinks that State Law does not apply to the Island we live on in their minds. The city has lost several circuit and State SC cases because of this attitude, and frankly, bad lawyering. City Charter does not trump state law.
Mayor Huether has asked the citizens of Sioux Falls to “trust in the process.” Â Well, it doesn’t appear that the process has been followed by his employees and you know who they get their marching orders from. This occurred during the Munson administration also (though he was more likely to break city charter then state law).*
Back to the lawsuit, Jay Woudstra, the Superintendent of Sioux Falls Christian got up and spoke out against WM at 69th and Cliff –  so why isn’t anyone from the Harrisburg School District not doing the same thing considering they have Journey Elementary, Endeavor Elementary and North Middle School (the last two being brand new and right off Western) all within a mile as the crow flies of this site.  Still a head scratcher to many I talk to. Obviously SFC is a private institution, and Harrisburg’s are public. I have noticed most public officials don’t want to touch the issue with a 10 foot pole. Only 2 city councilors have talked about it publicly, but the Mayor of SF & Harrisburg have zipped lips (for now anyway).
*I almost crapped a brick the other night when I saw Munson standing on Phillips to the Falls, defending Lloyd’s TIF’s for the area on TV. Talk about arrogance. Munson almost drops out of the Mayor’s race after being threatened with charges of breaking city ordinance over that street, then has the nerve to hold a TIF rally on the (illegal) street. WOW.
Aren’t you all going to feel silly when you discover what the word “plat” means?
“or any agricultural land”
I think this is more KEY then platted land.
Scott… you can’t just cherry-pick out one lone statute and assume that trumps all the others. Scroll up to SDCL 9-4-1 and what do you find??
9-4-1.1. Municipalities authorized to enter into annexation and development agreements with landowners. A municipality may enter into an agreement with any landowner specifying the conditions under which the landowner’s property may be annexed pursuant to § 9-4-1 or developed.
There are other relevant statutes as well… but the long story is there is more than one way to annex property and it isn’t always required to seek county approval first.
In this case, the landowner approached the city, and an agreement was formed based upon this statute. This has been done this way countless times before, so if SON is successful in this lawsuit it means people have been misinterpreting the law (and misapplying the law) for decades.
Either way – even if SON ‘wins’… what does this accomplish? It is nothing more than a stall tactic, because several Lincoln County Commissioners are already on record as saying land has been annexed like this in the past, and they have NOT come out and indicated they wouldn’t support it if they had to vote on it. So the end result is it gets kicked to LC for a vote and then back to the City for another vote with the same end result.
So again… what is SON’s real motive here? Seems to me (and a lot of other people) they are just trying to stall in the hopes Walmart will decide to build elsewhere. So now we are using our legal system as a speed bump rather than for justice?
They must think they have a case, they have spent almost $20,000 already.
You’re talking about people who bought homes that back up against 85th street and then want to complain about traffic… I don’t think logic has much to do with it.
It will be interesting to see how it all plays out, but from what I’ve been told they don’t have much chance of stopping Walmart if they want to rely upon the law. They might delay it… but they won’t be able to stop it unless Walmart opts out.
There are many who seem to think the issue is a basic traffic issue. It is. It is also one of at least three issues needing to be decided.
The traffic issue must be understood under the restrictions of SD100 being built adjoining the proposed Walmart property. The state will not allow any traffic openings or access directly onto Minnesota Ave. The distance between SD100 and 85th street is too close to allow Walmart a driveway onto Minnesota Ave. With this being restriction, all store traffic has to entrance and exit using the 85th street driveway.
There are no Walmart Superstores using a one driveway traffic method of entrance and exit to a secondary street. BTW, this will include truck traffic? Wow what a colossal mess in the making.
The judge just ruled, said 9-4-5 is ambiguous. the Esling case was dicta or a statement of opinion or belief considered authoritative though not binding, because of the authority of the person making it.
More to come…
Judge Tiede ruled in favor of the City (and Walmart) in the annexation lawsuit brought by SON. Sorry SON.
The real issue as I see it is three stay-at-home mom school graduates who are bored out of their skulls.
testor – 85th is NOT a “secondary street”. It is a major arterial.
That should read “three stay-at-home mom LAW school graduates who are bored out of their skulls.”
“Back to the lawsuit, Jay Woudstra, the Superintendent of Sioux Falls Christian got up and spoke out against WM at 69th and Cliff – so why isn’t anyone from the Harrisburg School District not doing the same thing considering they have Journey Elementary, Endeavor Elementary and North Middle School (the last two being brand new and right off Western) all within a mile as the crow flies of this site.”
So your standard for commercial development is “not within a linear mile of a school? The Sioux Falls school district built Rosa Parks within a half-mile of Dawley Farm and the east side Walmart. Was that an act of reckless irresponsibility?
There’s a pretty big difference between across the street and a mile away. About 5,000 feet, give or take.
Also testor – the issue isn’t too short a stretch of Minnesota Ave., but that SD 100 only allows access every 1/2 mile (EVERY intersect with a MAJOR ARETERIAL street) onto SD 100. 85th is 1/2 mile from SD 100. There could be at least 2 drives along that 1/2 mile on Minnesota. AT LEAST.
I hate to say I told you so. I don’t suspect this is the last lawsuit we will be seeing from SON… but in the end the only thing this did was thin their wallets a bit.
@ Testor: If Walmart honestly thought their only access point would be one driveway along 85th, they wouldn’t be pushing to build there. Give it time – before the first cubic yard of dirt is moved, they will have secured rights from the state to allow access from Minnesota and/or they will design another access point further to the South. The biggest complaint they have with the Louise store is access – they won’t make the same mistakes on this one.
Their Louise store has 6 driveways / entrances and we see the cluster. As stated long ago in the process, the state was refusing Walmart direct access to Minnesota Ave and SD100 so all traffic was to be directed onto 85th Street, a secondary road (although a busy one). It may be a major secondary street it is not a primary street of the city or will it ever be.
The “cluster” on the Louise is one good reason to have another Walmart on the south side. Ease traffic flow for the rest of Sioux Falls.
So let’s see, because Walmart built then overbuilt a store on Louise without good traffic control or access, the city should allow them to place another store fronting South Minnesota Ave without direct access to Minnesota Ave. This new store would dump their traffic onto a secondary arterial street sending thousands of vehicles per day through the bordering residential neighborhood.
What great city planning!
Let me repeat – Walmart will not build a store there if they only have one access point. To make that argument is simply ignorant. The state had indicated they would not allow access directly to Minnesota for a church that wanted to build right on the corner, but they have not said a single thing about a SuperCenter Walmart that would obviously result in thousands of vehicles per day. If you can find a quote from the state that indicates otherwise then by all means share – but the only thing I have seen thus far is rumors from the anti-Walmart brigade.
Rest assured they will find a solution and it will work just fine.
As I said, they don’t want to repeat the same mistakes as the Louise store. When that store was built, I don’t think anyone anticipated the popularity or the growth. You claim there are six access points, but the reality is well over 90% of the traffic enters or exists from the two that connect to Louise. The Southern access point with the stoplight is the preferred choice for at least 80% of the access and we have seen that it can create bottlenecks even with a traffic signal there.
We also know that Walmart has had issues with truck traffic behind the store as their loading area is undersized for that size store. They aren’t about to recreate the same mess elsewhere.
BTW Testor, even if Audie was the only access point in to or out from a Walmart at 85th and Minn. (which it will not be) how would that result in thousands of vehicles per day being dumped into a residential neighborhood? Have you actually been in the area – because if you have you would realize the residential streets in the neighborhood aren’t not straight through and would not benefit anyone other than those who live in the neighborhood. It would be significantly faster to exit onto 85th and head East or West depending upon the destination. Traveling through Twin Eagle would be a detour, thus aside from those living in that neighborhood they won’t experience any increased traffic. You maybe could make the argument Grange will see a few more cars, but all of that traffic will originate from Heather Ridge – it still isn’t a clear path to anywhere other than the neighborhoods which surround those streets.
The comical aspect of this is people are still complaining about the traffic yet the same group of people are ok with the store being built a half mile South. Where exactly do they think the traffic is going to go by relocating the store? It will end up in the same place… and the only benefit to SON is they won’t have to stare at a Walmart loading dock from their decks.
Walmart is likely going to get a right-in / right-out onto Minnesota.. The Harrisburg School District didn’t say anything because they probably respect the fact that one governmental body shouldn’t tell another how to do its job and, and.. the increased property tax dollars Walmart will bring only benefit the school district..
Also at the 69th and Cliff location Walmart would have been directly across the street from SF Christian – along the same roads that many of their students use to walk to and from school. The Harrisburg schools are a different beast – since there isn’t any residential South of the proposed Walmart there are no students to walk past it, and thus safety of the students shouldn’t be an issue.
The nearest school is still around 9 blocks away! Can you even find a big box store in Sioux Falls farther away from a School than that? Rosa Parks is actually closer to Dawley Farm than this proposed Walmart would be to Journey Elementary. The school issue is a non-starter, which is exactly why nobody from Harrisburg has said a peep about it.
SON might think mentioning three schools is a talking point for them, but from where I’m standing it makes them sound desperate. It is nothing more than an excuse.
My suggestion to SON is to drop the legal proceedings and lobby the HELL out of the city councilors.
This much we know;
Jamison (NO)
Staggers (YES – Probably)
Huether (YES – Probably, if he needs to break a tie.
I would guess that Entenman and Rolfing are probably Yes’s)
That leaves 4 councilors you have to lobby for a NO vote.
Not sure that is great advice DL. Remember – Walmart has precedence. There was already talk about the 69th and Cliff situation that indicated if they would have sued the city they would have won. It is no different here… if the city turns them down they will have to show why – and that will be difficult considering they have approved other retailers near residential areas.
All Walmart has to do is say – hey you let Hy-Vee build in a residential area (more than once in fact) and you let Menards build across the street from a residential area and you have allowed Lewis (the store… not the man) build in residential areas and you have allowed Ace Hardware to build and expand in residential areas… so why won’t you let Walmart build on a major intersection?
I suppose your idea has merit if it results in delays and Walmart may not want to mess around in courtrooms for the next year or two as that is a year or two of lost sales. The problem is – do you really think even with a bit of lobbying that you can convince a majority of the city council to say no?
Are you even sure about Jamison being a firm no? I got the impression he didn’t really like it, but legally speaking didn’t have a reason to say no. I also have to think if he is running for Mayor, would a no vote simply be a way to separate him from Huether, or would it be damaging to a candidate when we know public opinion generally indicates Walmart is welcomed.
Has anyone been out to 60th and Marion yet?
It is a full half mile from this intersection to the closest residential neighborhood to the south on Marion Road.
It is another 1/8 to 1/4 of a mile north to the front door of the proposed Walmart from this intersection.
This location is not directly adjacent to a neighborhood, has access to I-90 and I-29, and the infrastructure is there to handle the growth.
At 85th and Minnesota you have 85th as a gravel road running from Cliff Ave. to Minnesota. Across the street 85th is 4 lanes for about 40 yards and is two lanes from Minnesota to Western. Minnesota is a 4-lane until 85th and then tapers to a two lane in front of Soo Sports.
I agree with the SON folks. The city can do better than putting this so close to a residential neighborhood.
Craig, the Hyvee’s you speak of are 87,000 and 48,000 square feet. One is less then half the size of the WM being proposed and the other is about 30% the size. So no comparison there. And ACE Hardware? Are you trying to be funny? The fact is this is a 24 hour Supercenter! 185,000 square feet. Besides traffic and drainage issues, too big of a store, and it basically compares to NO retail in SF.
Does WM have the legal right to build? Sure. So why even go thru the city council? Why, because they need the taxpayers of SF to pay for the infrastructure, and the council must approve that. I have said it in the past, the SF city council represents taxpaying citizens of SF, not international retailers. By voting ‘NO’ all they are telling WM is that the citizens are not willing to pay for their infrastructure. Walmart can still build, but they will have to dig a Hell of a well.
Here is the exact language from the design report ( p10 http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=12&ved=0CC8QFjABOAo&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.siouxfalls.org%2F~%2Fmedia%2FDocuments%2Fmayor%2Fboards-commissions%2Fplanning-comm%2FFinal_Walmart_South_Site_TIA%2520-5-29-13.pdf&ei=Itz7UYXaHpKY9QStzoDoCQ&usg=AFQjCNFWoQ8nrs0sqZkS1pmJLVdRjWaQGA&cad=rja) :
“The study assumes two accesses for the site, a full access on 85th Street and a right-in/right-out only access on SD 115. The 85th Street access is proposed to be offset from the existing Audie
Avenue by 300 feet to the east, due to concerns of the residential neighborhood to the north. A variance is required for the right-in/right-out access on SD 115 because of the proximity to future
highway SD 100, but both accesses are expected to satisfy safety and operational requirements. Roadway network operations were also evaluated without the SD 115 access. In 2015, the North
Walmart Driveway at 85th Street is expected to be unable to handle the additional site traffic, with the improvements noted above. In 2035, both the North Walmart Driveway at 85th Street and SD 115 at 85th Street are expected to operate unacceptably, even with dual westbound left turn lanes from 85th Street onto the North Walmart Driveway.”
The consultants asked for access to Minnesota Ave but the state has indicated they will not allow it. They admit in the document issues with the limited vehicle access.
If you study the infrastructure Sioux Falls is going to be required to build for the long term plan , the taxpayers may never recover the costs through the ‘new’ taxes collected.
In other words, Walmart is planning to shift all costs of this store onto the taxpayers of Sioux Falls without our ability to collect enough taxes to pay for it. New roads, sewer, downstream water issues, a new commercial district in a residential neighborhood.
If you really look at the 85th street plan for 2015, there is still only a 2 lane street. who is going to pay for it when the city is already $400 million in debt with limited borrowing capacity left?
What about all the other street construction Walmart dreams of? Who will be paying for it? There are discussions of the 2035 plans, what do we do until then?
The area between 85th and SD100 was planned to be a light retail district. Now we are looking at a developer’s wet dream being paid for by more borrowed money to make it all look like progress.
Walmart has stated their intent with this build to ‘shift’ business from the Louise store to lighten the load on it. So we citizens will not see any additional tax revenue into the city coffers. What overall benefit are we to experience?
DL – I fail to see why Walmart should be singled out for infrastructure. If you build a “Bridges” type development on that corner like the residents of Twin Eagles have suggested, you would end up with needing the same types of infrastructure.
Any development needs basic infrastructure – water, sewer, storm drain etc. Let’s just be honest…. the cost of infrastructure really isn’t the gripe here – it is the name “Walmart” on the building.
Yes they are unique in that they are the world’s largest retailer, but a big box store is a big box store – an extra 20,000 square feet really doesn’t change much. The visual impact of a 24 hour Hy-Vee, and the traffic issues are much the same. The size of a Menards is also comperable – and I would argue you have a lot more truck traffic in an out of a Menards than you ever do in a Walmart, so if safety is a concern that should be mentioned.
@ Testor – I’ve reviewed the study you mention, but there are a few important things to note. First, it “assumes” things – which may or may not occur. Rest assured Walmart will need to secure those approvals before construction begins, because they in no way would proceed with only access at 85th. The study confirms this.
Second, what the state suggests they will allow isn’t set in stone. Even if they proceed with the right in, right out access along Minnesota, future traffic demands may result in changes down the road. Depending upon what comes further South from Walmart, there is also the possibility of a service or access road leading out to a Southern exit.
Third, it also shows they are offsetting the 85th access from Audie – which again reduces the impact to Twin Eagle residents as there is no reason for anyone to drive by their homes in a residential area knowing it will actually divert them in the wrong direction.
As far as 85th being a two lane street, those projections obviously are prior to a Walmart. The roadbed is already graded and the street lights are already installed, so adding the other two lanes isn’t going to a massive undertaking.
These arguments about infrastructure are pretty weak – I totally understand the anti-Walmart stance… I get it. I’m not a fan myself and I do NOT shop there. I won’t even shop at Sam’s because of their company policies (although very much looking forward to Costco). However I’m removing my personal bias on this issue and treating it as a retailer. I don’t have to like it, but the location is well suited for this type of development regardless of what SON thinks.
I’m sympathetic to them – I really am. I wouldn’t want to live across from a Walmart either, but that is why I opted to build/buy all of my homes in areas that were known to be residential only. I did my homework.
Also Testor – do you honestly believe Walmart is building a new store to merely shift sales from one store to another? Get real – most of their sales will come from people in the area and from Harrisburg. They will also experience organic growth and I’m sure you won’t even notice the impact on Louise.
How do I know this? Because the same things were said when the East side Walmart opened, yet the Louise store is busier than it has ever been. The new WM didn’t have any noticeable impact, and adding one or two new stores most likely won’t either.
I’m not singling out WM, I am pointing out the REASON why WM ‘Must’ have council approval before they can build, and it has NOTHING to do with their ‘legal rights’. Like I said, they already have the legal right to be there. This isn’t a question of ‘legality’ to the council, this is a question of approving a taxpayer expenditure to build infrastructure for them, which means we will be subsidizing them. Remember, they are only a ‘tax collector’ not a ‘tax generator’. Sure, we will get property taxes and excise taxes from the building of the store, but that isn’t squat when you compare how much road work/intersections/sewer/water and drainage issues we will have to pay for.
Let me repeat, and read this real slow. The council really needs to weigh the economic impact of this development (no matter what goes there) and ask the question, “Will we ever see our money back?” Maybe, but it won’t be in my lifetime.
I Also Am Not Singling Out WM. What Bothers Me Is Our Town Subsidizing The Out Of Town Owned Business Over The Needs Of A Locally Owned Group Of Businesses.
Just Because Someone Waves A Pile Of Cash In Front Of Some Officials We Have To Sacrifice Our Home Grown Folks.
If Jamison votes no does that mean he’ll get the votes of SON’s 295 Facebook fans and 11 Twitter followers in exchange for Huether getting to tar Jamison as being an anti-growth NIMBY? That’s a pretty lousy tradeoff in an election, if you ask me.
For as much as some of you blow SON up into being some kind of major force, their numbers show them to be nothing but a tiny and vocal fringe, the sound and fury signifying nothing. Nobody cares about their opposition except those of you that like to play inside baseball.
I live across the street from WalMart on Louise. On set of the driveways at WalMart(the ones close to Barnes and Noble) are only good for entering from the north, and then exiting to the south. Then there are the ones down by the stoplight. Are there any in back of the store? I don’t go back there. I would assume there are some for trucks in the back. All of the traffic on Louise isn’t because of WalMart, a lot of it goes straight north to where ever. I honestly hear more noise from the vehicles on 41st street than on Louise.
DL – the only thing the council MUST do is is make a decision based SOLELY on the requirements of the ordinance. Ask Minnehaha County Commission what happens when they make a zoning decision outside of their own rules.
Hornguy,
Not sure your NIMBY/anti-growth argument concerning Jamison would make much sense. Wasn’t he the only member of the council who supported Walmart at the corner of 69th & Cliff? If Huether tries to “tar” him as anti-growth that would be pretty short-sighted.
Also, I still haven’t heard from anyone yet who has been out to 60th & Marion, in addition to 85th & Minnesota. Would sure like to hear Hornguy, Ruf, & Craig give us their comparisons on these two locations.
I have been past the 60th North site even more frequently to the 85th/MN site. IMO – the 60th N site has even more potentrial traffic/congestion potential than does the 85th/MN/SD100. 60th N and Marion are each lesser streets to 85th or MN. There are nearby employment centers, a UNIVERSITY, a new SF Middle school and rapidly expanding housing development in that immediate area. It is more remote to alternative shopping than is 85th/MN and
will also e drawing more shoppers from out-of-town (Hartford, Madison, etc.) adding to the congestion.
BTW – SD DOT will be expanding S. Minnesota to 4 lanes all the way to Harrisburg in 2015.
So Many Who Are Commenting On This Are Dwelling On The Superficial. The Totality Of The Project Is Wrong Based On What The Area Was Originally Designed For. All Lloyd And WM Would Need To Do To Satisfy 99%
Of The Issues Would Be Move The Proposed Store To The South Side Of SD100
Carhart – in terms of Jamison, I was only commenting on DL’s suggestion that Jamison may be a no vote. Jamison can prattle on about insider things like how city agencies are run or the mayor’s relationship with council, but nobody votes on that stuff.
I’m guessing this Walmart thing is a solid 60/40 or 70/30 issue in favor of development based on online chatter and informal surveys done by local media. But Jamison has to find *some* way to start differentiating himself to voters, otherwise Huether’s just going to hug him to death in the campaign and run up another 60/40 win. And I’ll be willing to bet that there isn’t going to be a bigger issue that council deals with prior to the election in terms of media coverage than this Walmart ordeal. If Jamison wants to drive the wedge, he’s got a perfect opportunity to directly attack the Mayor’s development strategy at Tuesday’s meeting.
In terms of the locations, I think both are fine. Not perfect – there are definitely some drainage issues to mitigate at 85th and Minnesota – but certainly suitable. Those roads at the 60th and N. Marion location will be widened, it’s not even a mile off of an interstate interchange, and the creation of a retail nexus on the northwest side of town will provide shopping options for growing residential areas in that neck of the woods as well as capture traffic from rural areas to the north and west.
In both instances, we’re talking about parts of town that presently have few to no retail options. I think the south side is in more immediate need but the northwest side will get there quickly. I’m no fan of sprawl but Sioux Falls went down the path of segregated zoning decades ago and getting the toothpaste back into that tube is a long and arduous process and almost certainly means creating additional retail nexuses around the city.
In the end, C-4 is C-4. Where municipalities end up in hot water is when they start trying to cherry-pick within zoning classifications. My guess is that unless there’s some kind of rabbit in SON’s hat, the outcome here is very predictable.
“Ask Minnehaha County Commission what happens when they make a zoning decision outside of their own rules.”
I thought a judge just said county commission’s opinion either doesn’t matter or is not needed in these matters, just saying.
As for comparing the Northwest location to the SE location, I about shit my pants laughing. There is NO residential in that area compared to the SE location. The the SE location would probably do double the sales the NW location would do, it is a red herring to them, so much so, it still hasn’t even gone thru the planning commission yet. My guess is that if the CC approves the WM at the SE location on Tuesday, the WM request for the NW location will be withdrawn, and if that happens, everyone on the council will stand around with their dicks in their hands going, “Ah, what’s that all about?” This shit is pre-determined, and it is sad that we can’t even have influence on our own city government anymore without being railroaded by a hospital, a subprime CC or a white trash retailer with Mr. Potter in their pocket.
“and if that happens, everyone on the council will stand around with their dicks in their hands going, “Ah, what’s that all about?
DL, does this include Michele and Sue?
I plead the 5th
“it is sad that we can’t even have influence on our own city government anymore without being railroaded by a hospital, a subprime CC or a white trash retailer with Mr. Potter in their pocket.”
And finally your true feelings surface. “White trash retailer.” Classy, man.
You moan and complain about the arrogance of developers, the mayor, members of council, and yet in the end, you have just as much if not more contempt for the “we” that shows up, votes, and picks leaders – those “white trash” voters that fill the Walmart parking lots every day (your words, not mine). It’s that the “we” vote, “we” don’t seem to share your thoughts or opinions or your I-know-best version of how things should be done.
The only difference between you and your perception of the mayor and certain council members is that you’re not willing to leave your seat in the peanut gallery to put your own name on the ballot. Why stick your own neck out when you can just sit back and complain about how everyone else is doing it, right?
With Madison, Mitchell, or Sioux Falls being the only major places people in the rural communities North and West of SF can shop for many of their goods, the NW Walmart is a given. No way they will not build it.
Hornguy,
Just an observation, You don’t see sites dedicated to “People of Shopko”….
It does seem Walmart brings out the worst in humanity.
Joan,
If you are living across from a Walmart, you are in most likely an apartment building and renting vs owning a single family house.
The progression Sioux Falls has in other developing areas is buffering. Single family residential, town homes, then offices, strip malls, then gradually the big box store. There is a difference if you are owning your property vs renting.
Jackilope, we have Joan and all others trying to use the mix use is good because there are people living across Louise. Once again its bull.
The apartments Joan is living in have been there since the late 1970’s when there was nothing else out there. It was a gravel road leading to them so the people working at the new mall had some place to live. Walmart and the city have had to make many changes to the traffic patterns on Louise since the original WM was placed there. Remember when the WM was the size of a Kmart? Joan you do not apparently drive a car or pay much attention to traffic. There are at least 8 traffic access points to the WM complex to move the traffic. Considering the limited space available, the owners of the project have done a decent job. Who knew it was going to grow as it did.
The two current Walmarts are in planned developments. The Louise store is part of the Meadowlark development. It is a private / public planned project for good traffic flow. The east Walmart is part of the Dawley Farm project. Another planned retail / residential project for mixed use. Lloyd did not and does not offer this project as planned development. It is a store dropped into a neighborhood without any consideration to the current residents.
The shrill of building permits, Building Permits, BUILDING PERMITS!!! is more important then the supposed quality of life these building permits are suppose to enhance.
So once again, we are back to dropping big boxes into residential neighborhoods without consideration for the rules everyone else had to follow. We have a city council in the pocket of the developers do the work for the developers so they can have some sort of bragging rights and nothing more.
South WM is not being “dropped into” a neighborhood (which would be good – limiting wasteful sprawl -love to see a downtown Walmart similar to LA, Chicago, Seattle etc. new Walmarts). It is being built “on a corner of an edge” of a neighborhood (continuing wasteful sprawl) – and you are dishonestly inventing a reality simply to perpetuate argumentation.
ruf, so by your argumentation comment above, ‘dropping’ an oversized WM into a planned area is not inventing a reality by making it a reality through abuse of system?
“People of Shopko”
Thanks for the laugh of the day.
testor – is your definition of the “center of a neighborhood” 160 acres of beans, surrounded by corn fields on three sides??
“I still haven’t heard from anyone yet who has been out to 60th & Marion, in addition to 85th & Minnesota. Would sure like to hear Hornguy, Ruf, & Craig give us their comparisons on these two locations.”
I’m not exactly sure what you’re looking for here. The two locations are very, very different and for a number of reasons. Obviously the 60th and Marion road store would serve a different area including Crooks and Hartford as well as the very quickly growing area Northeast Sioux Falls. They would likely also pull shoppers from the Interstates, they have advantages of University Center being in the area, and they have two Interstate exits within what…. maybe a mile?
Obviously the store is much different than their existing stores and the proposed store at 85th and Minnesota. Is that a bad thing? Are we suggesting Walmart will only build under one specific set of conditions?
Seems to me their greatest challenge (aside from public opinion) is ensuring they are located in an area with major streets adjacent to their property. Whether you look in Sioux Falls or any other city within 300 miles that has a Walmart you tend to find the same thing… they build along major roads or where major roads are planned. This helps with visibility as well as access, and it seems to be working for them because they keep doing it. Check Mitchell, Rapid City, Watertown, Vermillion, Yankton, Aberdeen… they all seem to follow a basic pattern.
So in short I do think both locations offer what they are looking for, but I’m also not entirely convinced they are really ready to build the NW store. As Lewis mentioned they pulled out of it once already, and although we see a lot of growth in that area, I’m still not sure it fits their model. Give it another few years and yes I think it would be what they are looking for, but I’m not convinced they are as eager to build that store as they are the 85th and Minn location.
Testor is still sticking to his “at least 8 traffic access points to the WM complex to move the traffic” nonsense, but that argument doesn’t fly.
Anyone who has ever spent more than three minutes in that area knows full well that 90% of the traffic into Walmart originates from Louise in one of the two access points. The one with the signal light probably makes up the majority (80%+) with the right in – right out near Barnes and Noble making up a small percentage of input and a slightly larger out.
The access point that leads to Sam’s is hardly viable. The access point to the Southwest and the one to the Northwest are utilized by a very, very small group of shoppers.
Where you actually come up with 8 access points is beyond me… that is some fuzzy math. So let’s review:
1. Signal light off Louise directly across from apartments. Used by 90+% of all Walmart traffic on a daily basis.
2. Right in – right off from Louise by B&N. Since it is right-in only, is only used as an access point for people who know Walmart well and wish to buy groceries, or when the signaled access to the North is busy. Used quite a bit to exit as it prevents the logjam at the traffic signal for those turning right.
3. SW access behind store to Shirley ave. Has speedbumps and passes a loading area that is often full of smaller delivery trucks. Commonly used by Sioux Falls residents who think they found a shortcut only to realize they can’t turn left onto Shirley due to the traffic heading from Menards or into the McDonalds drive through.
4. NW access behind store (between WM and Sam’s). This is commonly used by people jumping between WM and Menards. Some people who use the auto shop tend to use this access point, but it seems a fraction of the access from Louise. This is also the primary access point for both Sam’s and Walmart delivery trucks. Technically there are two driveways separated by a 30ft section of boulevard, so if you counting this as two access points you’re stretching even farther than I gave you credit for.
The only way you get to 8 is to include the “access” points that dump into the B&N parking lot, the Chili’s parking lot, or the Sam’s club parking lot. Oh wait… are you counting the access into the Batteries Plus parking lot too?
Give me a break. For all intents and purposes the Louise Walmart has three main access points and one of them sees 90% of the usage because it has a stop light. If they build a WM at 85th and Minn, the access will actually be better than the Louise location because the Minnesota right-in access will take most of the Southbound traffic while the 85th access will take those coming from the West as well as Northbound traffic along Minnesota. There is also the potential to have a rear service road that will connect to future development in the area, which eventually will probably loop around somewhere near Grange ave and/or there may even be a future access road all the way back to Western. In the longer term, access to that new store would be far greater than what we have now.
But wait… there’s more!
Even if the 85th and Minnesota never has anything more than those two access points, it would STILL be no worse than the Eastside Walmart. The Eastside store only has two access points as well – one to Arrowhead Parkway (Hwy 42) via Foss to the Northwest, and one to Highline Place to the Northeast which also dumps to Hwy 42. So most of that traffic ends up on the same road – and yet when is the last time you heard of massive traffic issues at the Eastside Walmart even knowing their entire store has only two access points for both customer traffic as well as deliveries?
Thus we can close the book on the access argument. It doesn’t hold up. Move on.
Try all you can, the traffic moves through the 8 access points. Granted most use the Louise Ave entrance and exit points but watch the movement of vehicles and you will see how people almost drive over each other to migrate the lots.
The city has redone the 41st ans Louise corner several times in the past 20 years to move the traffic jams. Looking at the report provided, the city is going to have a mess down at 85th and Minn for sometime to come.
I can only wonder how the upset WM shoppers will be as they start running over pedestrians trying to live their live on Audi. Pedestrian speed bumps…
Well that is some fuzzy math Testor… and it shows how you continually are grasping at excuses to consider Walmart at 85th and Minnesota a failure even before a single yard of dirt is moved.
You’ve complained about drainage issues, you’ve complained about access, you’ve complained about traffic. Yet none of your arguments hold water… unless of course you can convince anyone other than yourself that the connection between Walmart and the Batteries Plus parking lot is actually a viable access point. Good luck with that.
I mean seriously – you just ignored the fact that the Eastside Walmart only has two access points and it functions perfectly fine, yet somehow in your mind the same number of access points on another Walmart is a huge gigantic failure? The logic does not compute.
Add to this you are trying to equate 41st and Louise with 85th and Minnesota? That is a another gigantic leap. 41st and Louise is a lot more going on than simply Walmart…. it is the economic hub of Sioux Falls. Within 1/2 mile you have a dozen big box stores, numerous major retailers, a mall, upwards of 70 different eatery choices, a half dozen car dealerships, movie theaters, furniture stores, apartment complexes, numerous hotels and two Interstate access points.
Come talk to me when 85th and Minnesota has more than a big box store, a boat dealership, and a couple of strip malls and then we can talk about “traffic jams”.
As to your pedestrian speed bumps, considering the access point to the South will be offset from the Northern section of Audie, there should never be a case where it would be an issue unless Twin Eagle residents decide to convince their children to play in the middle of 85th street. We are also being told that there will be a median in that location so Twin Eagle residents won’t be able to turn left onto 85th in order to eliminate their concerns with pass-through traffic.
But hey – don’t let any of that get in the way or your overly dramatic scenarios.
Flooding! Traffic!! Kids being ran over!!!! Walpocalypse 2013!!!!!