UTAH SITE FIGHT: NO BIG BOXES IS A GOOD THING

Topics: | | Community Impact | Utah | | |

Parleys Wal-Mart: A small victory for the future [Salt Lake Tribune]

When a unanimous Salt Lake City Planning Commission said no to Wal-Mart’s request to rezone the site of the old Kmart store on Parleys Way, it increased the chances that someday that property may be redeveloped as something other than a big box store with a grocery in it. That’s a good thing.
But for the time being, that probably won’t slow Wal-Mart’s plans for a supercenter. Because the existing store is a nonconforming use that included a grocery, Wal-Mart can remodel the 40-year-old building into a supercenter. That’s what Wal-Mart representatives say the company will do if it doesn’t get the rezoning necessary to build a new store when the final decision goes to the City Council.
So, in terms of automobile traffic that Wal-Mart will generate, or the competitive impact it will have on neighboring businesses, the Planning Commission’s decision doesn’t mean much. There still will be a Wal-Mart on the site that could be open 24 hours a day.

Some people will like that, some people won’t. But the fact is that the location lends itself to a big-box store. Its proximity to two arterial streets, Foothill Drive and Parleys Way, and the I-215 interchange means that existing streets can handle the added traffic volume the store will generate.
What’s more, those same streets also make it difficult for anyone to walk to the site. (The exception is the folks who live in the large apartment complex
to the north.) So, the dream of the Wal-Mart opponents that the property would be redeveloped instead as a walkable, mixed-use complex of housing, offices and smaller businesses probably is not economically feasible, at least today.
But who knows? In another 40 years, market conditions may be different. That’s the wisdom in the Planning Commission’s decision. By denying the zoning change to allow a grocery in a new building, and also turning down a complementary amendment in the area’s master plan, the commission preserves the community’s preference that a business use for the property other than a supercenter be found if it is redeveloped in the future.
In the process, the commission gave up the leverage it would have had to set conditions for greener building standards and certain amenities as part of the bargain for a rezone. But Wal-Mart had not shown much flexibility in that regard anyway.
The dream of the Wal-Mart opponents that the property would be redeveloped instead as a walkable, mixed-use complex probably is not economically feasible.

Posted by Luke West on Tuesday, September 16, 2008