Urban planning community

+ Reply to thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 26 to 30 of 30

Thread: In the name of "economic development", everything becomes okay

  1. #26
    Cyburbian TerraSapient's avatar
    Registered
    Nov 2009
    Location
    The Glass City
    Posts
    2,610
    Quote Originally posted by Gotta Speakup View post
    I guess I'm conflicted. I don't shop at target/walmart/whatever.

    But if a big box store or any type of store wants to come into a community an comply with the previously agreed upon design standards and no get any public funds, then I think they should be allowed in. To what extent is the opposition just MINBYism or BANANAism? Who are we to say that if the level of jobs is too low, then we don't want them in our community and the those who might benefit from those jobs should not have them?

    Again, there is a need for strong environmental standards, strong design standards, etc. so a tire recycler would be out. But government should not be deciding between store brands. Make everyone provide health insurance, have a high minimum wage, but let anyone in who complies with that.
    I agree completely. In this case (Target is being built right now) what was frustrating was that the company wasn't willing to negotiate with the community at all. It wasn't about Target specifically, it was about the size of the facility and their model of sustainability, being that they planned for people to drive from all over the island to shop there when Oahu already has terrible traffic problems (frequently LOS D, E, and F). That, and the understanding that 250 jobs at Target wouldn't really generate new jobs at all, but would simply shift jobs since their opening would likely put smaller locally owned places out of business (prices aside, simple brand recognition often persuades people to shop somewhere, even if the prices are similar).

    This is a perfect example of plans needing regulation to back them up. The area's sustainable communities plan is a guide for development, but it cannot enforce anything. It is like a gentlemen's agreement, which has worked for Hawaii for a long time, but now that companies from all over the world have interest in locating here, they are bringing their culture with them and the islands are reacting rather than planning ahead. If the sustainable communities plan had teeth, the community could have said "no, you have to build one of your compact stores" that Target refused to build.
    Occupy Your Brain!

  2. #27
    Cyburbian wahday's avatar
    Registered
    May 2005
    Location
    New Town
    Posts
    3,831
    Quote Originally posted by Gotta Speakup View post
    Again, there is a need for strong environmental standards, strong design standards, etc. so a tire recycler would be out. But government should not be deciding between store brands. Make everyone provide health insurance, have a high minimum wage, but let anyone in who complies with that.
    I agree that we should not be playing favorites and that there should be a formula of sorts in place that relocating businesses must achieve before being considered. But this also points out one a city creating regulations or benchmarks relocating businesses must subscribe to. If its the state requiring these things as a requirement, that's great. More more often, its municipalities. So what can happen is that the neighboring jurisdiction (lets say the county that is in need of increased revenue) says "hey, park that Target Tire Fire Call Center across the line in our zone and we'll welcome you in." The net result ends up being the same if its a bad deal - the business doesn't care if a particular employee lives in the city or the county and they still may avoid the big issues like insurance, livable wages, etc. that made the city turning them down.

    Anyone seen this kind of pattern in their neck of the woods? This is one of the challenges we have with our regional planning authority (that really has no power to enforce, just to cajole and prod other jurisdictions to get on board). They develop plans and concepts that are sound and could be effective for guiding development in the whole region, but only if everyone in the region adopts them, which they often don't.
    The purpose of life is a life of purpose

  3. #28
    Cyburbian TerraSapient's avatar
    Registered
    Nov 2009
    Location
    The Glass City
    Posts
    2,610
    Quote Originally posted by wahday View post
    Anyone seen this kind of pattern in their neck of the woods? This is one of the challenges we have with our regional planning authority (that really has no power to enforce, just to cajole and prod other jurisdictions to get on board). They develop plans and concepts that are sound and could be effective for guiding development in the whole region, but only if everyone in the region adopts them, which they often don't.
    I remember this being a substantial issue back in NW Ohio. The end result being various municipalities quarreling with and cut-throating each other to get businesses to locate within their boundaries.
    Definitely a lose-lose situation.
    Occupy Your Brain!

  4. #29
    Cyburbian chupacabra's avatar
    Registered
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    273
    I'm surprised that Target was able to find a parcel big enough (and affordable enough) for a store in Kailua. I'm also surprised to hear that they think Kailua is a good location for a store that is going to draw people from across the island. Kailua is kind of a pain in the ass to get to.
    You can grow ideas in the garden of your mind.

  5. #30
    Cyburbian
    Registered
    Jul 2010
    Location
    BC, Canada
    Posts
    218
    This is a perfect example of plans needing regulation to back them up. The area's sustainable communities plan is a guide for development, but it cannot enforce anything. It is like a gentlemen's agreement, which has worked for Hawaii for a long time, but now that companies from all over the world have interest in locating here, they are bringing their culture with them and the islands are reacting rather than planning ahead. If the sustainable communities plan had teeth, the community could have said "no, you have to build one of your compact stores" that Target refused to build.
    I find this particularly a problem in smaller communities. In one community I worked in, I asked if they were implementing their strategic plan's design recommendations. They said yes, they gave a copy of the (non-regulatory) plan to anyone developing in the district and told them, "this is what we'd like to see."

+ Reply to thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2

More at Cyburbia

  1. Replies: 6
    Last post: 18 Feb 2008, 12:48 PM
  2. Replies: 2
    Last post: 19 Nov 2006, 9:28 PM
  3. Other economic development "forums"
    Economic and Community Development
    Replies: 3
    Last post: 15 May 2006, 7:54 PM
  4. Measurement of "economic condition" of a place
    Economic and Community Development
    Replies: 9
    Last post: 09 May 2005, 12:33 PM
  5. Replies: 2
    Last post: 18 Aug 1999, 4:11 PM