Reader comments
Commission says no to Wal-Mart rezone

This small group of 100 angry and I presume always grumpy people don't speak for me... I would love to have the new updated Wal-Mart This K-Mart on this site has been blight for years!! What is it going to change if they tear down the old store or remodel the current store. I think your just against Wal-Mart!!

Nice job Planning Commission and residents. Keep the neighborhood in your hands and speak out for what you want. Its good to see the system working. Vote NO to the rezone!

if i were wal-mart i would do the bare minimum required. the street runs both ways. if the council wants to follow the letter of the law then so be it. i personally applaud them for sticking to thier guns. however wal-mart should not in any way go out of its way to include ANY green friendly features, zero landscape improvements, etc... this way the company meets budget and the residents they get what they asked for, inflexible, noncompromising, bare minimum shopping.

congrats to all you really stuck it to the evil company.

First of all.. I am not a fan of Wal-Mart.. however if we're stuck having a Wal-Mart in our neighborhood then why not at least have an attractive building? Such as the one in Bountiful. The K-Mart building is horrendously ugly.. Now not only will we have a Wal-Mart in the neighborhood.. We'll have an ugly one. Way to be stubborn!

Thanks, Jared, for more balanced and accurate coverage than what the Tribune has been producing. The issue, and cause for the residents to be so stubborn, is that they worked hard for many years to get the 1995 zoning to disallow buildings over 15,000 square feet without public process, and make the KMart supercenter a "noncomplying structure."
WalMart bought the property aware of this restriction, but is trying to "give us" a 120,000 square foot building.
The 2005 zoning amendment that passed after WalMart purchased the property simply defined the allowable uses for each zone, and disallowed "supercenters." WalMart (or anyone else) was already prevented from opening a supercenter because of the earlier size restriction, so the 2005 zoning action is irrelevant, but WalMart is trying to convince us otherwise.

Gotta agree with you there.

Lets face it, the people who came and complained at the commission meeting are the sort of people who want to keep WM out at any cost. They wont shop there regardless of how nice the building is, because they have political reasons against it. Which means, why bother to humor them?

Due to WM's prices, there would be enough people who will shop there to keep it profitable, even if they built it out of bare cinderblock.

Interesting how the locals decided to be asinflexible as they are, and then accuse WM of being a bad neighbor.

In Centerville, they negotiated, and got a nice store, donations to the police department for traffic enforcement, and contributions for freeway interchange improvements.

Enjoy your traffic woes and lovely views, boneheads. If you think you're keeping the po'folks out of your posh neighborhoods, think again.

And frankly, thats really what this is, isn't it? You just really don't like "those sort" of people who shop at WM up in your neck of the woods. Only Mexicans and white trash shop there, right?

Just admit it, guys.

I agree with anonymous - Walmart should now do the bare minimum. Paint the building and change the sign. That will really "stick it" to the big nasty corporation; They'll spend less money and still get thousands of customers in their door. I can't believe the elitist additude of the vocal minority in Sugarhouse.

An American Company wants to invest millions of dollars into a new brand new energy efficient nice looking building and site, and the residnets would rather have a run down piece of junk?

I'm as anti-walmart and big box stores as they come, but those east side residents really shot themselves in the foot. They will be getting the exact same store, but with less landscaping.

A less-green development makes zero sense.

Way to go, guys.

I love wal-mart. Only because they officer prices most people can afford. People are just against big businesses. Too bad, because it only hurts the people who need a place to save money. Everything is way to expensive these days. Too bad snooty people prevented a nice building, green grass and a few trees. Good job rum dums

Although Walmart promised an energy efficient and green built new store, when push came to shove, they refused to be accountable for that promise. When the Commission asked if Walmart would agree to have the building LEED certified, Walmart said no. Why should they get a rezone if they won't commit to being accountable for their promises?

WalMart will be in the exact same location of an old KMart regardless of the zone change. This is a great example of the tar and feather mentality of uniformed residents with money but no common sense. If you really liked the neighborhood, you would change the zoning to allow a new building with better landscaping and energy efficient design. But I guess it is more important to be ideologcally pure than rational.

I just love how people that are no where NEAR the property in questions, and sometimes not even in this state, are telling us how we should have our neighborhood. If you want a Wal-Mart and stores like it, you are free to move to places that have one. And just as we do not tell you where to live and what should go in your neighborhood, quit telling us what we should have and do.

The question is not whether or not they are coming to the parleys way location. The question is has Wal-Mart shown significant reason to amend the master plan of the area. The answer to that is No. They could, if they so choose, do nearly everything they have proposed via the existing zone. They do not need a rezone to make the build "beautiful", to add tress and landscaping, to re-strip the parking lot, to add pedestrian walk ways, to add green features to the building, nor do they need a re-zone to plant trees. They can do ALL of that via the current zone.

The question for the community is risk and managing that risk. On one side we run the risk of having Wal-Mart do absolutely nothing to the building and leaving the building as the ugly eye sore that it is. On the other side we have the risk that if the rezone is granted we will not have as much say as they have promised, they will not do all the things they have verbally committed to (which after being pressed by a Commissioner last night, they agreed they would only do what other businesses are required to do and nothing more), and we will not for 40-50 years be able to move the zoning back down to something the neighborhood wants.

Our appetite for risk is not that high. We would much rather live with the ills we have then the ills we not of. We would much rather live with an ugly building for a few more years with the hope that eventually Wal-Mart will leave and we might be able to get something in that space that is conducive to the neighborhood.

anon848 makes sense. Do it like Centerville, Clinton and other communities have done. I am surprised the planning commission was so closed minded as to not see a huge bargining chip for Wal-Mart money to make the area nicer.

But then again, this is a win win. The 100 vocals can now go around saying we won! we won! To Wal-Mart, most likely this was not a lose situation. They get their store regardless. Now they will save thousands of dollars in community improvments and still have a booming business as soon as they open the door.

The comments above from "the risks" are really sad. The store will be there for years. Perhaps your chance for the neighborhood upgrade it shounds like you want has now been lost.

No, it is not sad. We are not looking at the short term, as you are. We are looking at the long term. If we grant them a rezone, chances are we will never get what we want. If we deny them a rezone, then we bank on the idea that they will not be successful because they have not really done their market research and they do not under stand the demographics.

Note: They will do a lot of business initially. A lot of people will travel great distances to go to that store to make a point. But 12 months down the road, they will not. So we bank on the idea that in 5-10 years, Wal-Mart will leave (which statistically is highly likely) and then we have a chance of getting something we want.

We are not impulsive we understand and know how to balance long term desires with short term gains.

Seems the short sighted pro Walmart folks are high on emotion and low on logic and facts. As if communities outside the Foothill area really give a crap about the trees. They are seething with class envy. They can continue to shop at the lovely 300 west and beautiful 9th east locations.
Those in the community who bothered to take the time to attend the meetings have generally made cohesive
and obviously persuasive arguments for rejecting the rezone.

The comments suggesting Walmart remodel with poor aesthetics, just to get even with the community is truly laughable.

It's not going to happen, at least not for that reason.

If Walamart produces an ugly building (new or remodel)
It will be because that is what Walmart does best.

Nice job Planning Commission. Way to listen to area residents.

Walmart could do all those lovely things without having to have a superstore. As is it, they will be remodeling the old building so those of you who cry "oh those dumb people want to keep that eyesore" are off the mark. I highly doubt (as Onward suggests) that Walmart will leave the eyesore as it is because the Planning Commission didn't cave to their demands. They are still in business to make a profit and no one wants to shop in a dump. Also, for those suggesting that the residents should have used the opportunity to bargain for some other things - grow up! We know what we want in our neighborhood and it isn't Walmart. If we have to put up with them, they can put up with the existing zoning and building. And I am pretty sure that they could tear down and build a new building if that is what they wanted, as long as it is within the zoning size restrictions. They bought the property and took the chance that they could twist some arms and get what they wanted. Now I hope the city council will enforce the zoning.