Shoppes At Market Pointe (SEC 72 & Giles)

[Coyote]

Suit won't delay grading for 72nd, Giles Wal-Mart plaza

Grading will begin this spring on a proposed a Wal-Mart shopping center near Papillion, the developer said Tuesday.

Owen Buckley, president of the R.H. Johnson Co. of Kansas City, Mo., said he is confident that he will prevail over neighbors who are suing him over the center's size and effect on the area.

Heavy equipment and trucks drove onto the 74-acre Market Pointe site at 72nd Street and Giles Road on Tuesday, but it appeared that little or no earth had been moved.

Buckley said initial work will include grading, earth compaction and installation of some utilities. Workers will strip topsoil, fill low areas and install silt fences, he said.

The center would include a Lowe's home improvement store, a Wal-Mart Supercenter and a Kohl's department store.

William Gast, a lawyer representing neighbors, said Buckley is taking a gamble. "I think he's overconfident," Gast said.

Gast said he would be shocked to see buildings go up, which he said would have to be torn down if neighbors won.

Papillion City Administrator Dan Hoins said Tuesday that Buckley has authority to begin construction. There is no court order prohibiting work before the lawsuit is decided.

The Papillion City Council approved Market Pointe last July. Neighbors formed a group called ProPapillion and sued R.H. Johnson, the landowner and the City of Papillion.

They lost in Sarpy County District Court, but their appeal is on file with the Nebraska Court of Appeals.

Gast said the lawsuit has advanced status, meaning it will be scheduled for oral arguments ahead of several other cases. He expects oral arguments in late summer and possibly a decision around Thanksgiving.

Buckley said he expects the litigation to be concluded by the time he is ready to start construction of the buildings.[/size]

[Golden Eagle]

Wal Martify me. No wait- please don't.

[omahastylee459]

i hate walmart!

[DTO Luv]

I wonder if we could put a metro-wide limit on the stores.

[eomaha]

I'm just interested to see what all this wrangling will bring about in terms of architectural 'appeal'. Will this Walmart go beyond the simple brick facade concessions which have been made in the latest stores thrown up in Omaha?

On a positive note... Papillion residents will appreciate the adjoining Kohl's (oh what are we saying... the vast majority of average consumers love Walmart... and it will be welcomed with open arms).

wonder if we could put a metro-wide limit on the stores

One would hope that Walmart is already at THEIR limit (after the addition of the still coming northwest location, along with this Papillion location at least).

[flyOMA]

I can't wait until the new Maple location opens! Now I don't have to subject myself to the grueling 2 mile drive to the West Center Wal-Mart.

The scary part is, all of these Wal-Mart's parking lots are full. They could start building across the street from one another (ala Starbucks) and they would still be full. Welcome to "Generica".

[DTO Luv]

Having never known a world w/o Walmart, was there ever a store that had such a monopoly on retail like Walmart has? Where Kmarts, Shopko's, or Targets ever a threat to smaller local businesses? I know these types of stores put out DT shopping.

[Golden Eagle]

I wonder if we could put a metro-wide limit on the stores.

No. Just thank god Omaha is nowhere near Bentonville, which is oddly spared from excessive Wal Marts. Oh but 100 miles SW, in OKC Wal Mart has their corporate playground, basically meaning that they test their formats in OKC. Take a drive down OKC's loop 240 and tell me what you see.

[pretend] Oh, there is a Wal Mart Neighborhood Market under construction... oh, and right next door is a Target. In the same shopping center is a Wal Mart Supercenter. Strange. Ooooh... at this intersection there is a Wal Mart Dsicount Store. KMart is in the same shopping center. Never seen a Wal Mart Quick Lube until now... [/pretend]

You get my point. Other places in the country have it much worse. OKC bears the brunt of the shopping center mania so other metros don't have to.

[OmahaDevelopmentMan]

A Wal Mart discount store?!?! What do they sell, crappier |expletive|!?

[Golden Eagle]

Yes and no. It is like the supercenter, w/o the groceries, and |expletive| so crappy it'll make you cry. For the lower income areas, but there are exceptions like the afore mentioned 240 corridor in OKC. I guess b/c they ALL must be starving that fomat doesn't have a grocery store.

Wal Mart's attempt at a Super DollarCenter.

Bigots!

[Coyote]

[Golden Eagle]

Ha!

I knew I was forgetting a format... Sams Club. There is another one...

*pulls up the OKC online webpages*

Anyway, can't you just say they suck? That's a pretty liberal argument.

[Brad]

Papillion Wal-Mart gets OK from court

http://www.omaha.com/index.php?u_pg=1636&u_sid=2063411

Papillion will finally get its Wal-Mart.

The Nebraska Supreme Court today cleared the way for construction of a 74-acre shopping center that will include a Wal-Mart Supercenter, Lowe's home improvement store and Kohl's department store.

The court affirmed a Sarpy County District Court ruling that found the Papillion City Council acted legally in approving the Market Pointe center at 72nd Street and Giles Road.

The developer said he's pleased with the ruling and plans to start construction on buildings this fall, with a target opening date of Oct. 1, 2006.

[MTO]

|expletive| WAL*MART

[MTO]

|expletive| |expletive| |expletive| |expletive| |expletive| |expletive| |expletive| WALMART... |expletive| EM

[almighty_tuna]

So you're saying you'd like have some passionate time with Wal-Mart?

[MTO]

So you're saying you'd like have some passionate time with Wal-Mart?

oOoOOOoooOoOOoo Yeah, “GET OVER HERE YOU!”

[TitosBuritoBarn]

I agree with that Bradley. I prefer to look at things on a positive side.

[joeglow]

I LOVE WalMart. If someone is willing to sell me Lucky Charms for $1 less a box than anyone else and match all competitor ads (effectively allowing me to take advantage of EVERYONE's sales at one place), I am going there.

[scraper]

While I don't agree with their employment practices or corporate citizenship, both of which I think are improving because of public pressure, how can you fault a company for being successful when it started as a mom and pop shop, and through hard, hard work and incredible foresight from Sam Walton, became a capital success unlike anything the world has ever seen. Its capitalism at its finest.

[Asten]

I LOVE WalMart. If someone is willing to sell me Lucky Charms for $1 less a box than anyone else and match all competitor ads (effectively allowing me to take advantage of EVERYONE's sales at one place), I am going there.

Well, K-Mart and Target both do that, and they're quite a bit less evil.

[Swift]

The difference between Target and Wal*Mart is largely defined by their locations of origin. Target is from Minneapolis and sells Isaac Mizrahi and dorm room paraphenalia, Wal*MArt is from Arkansas and sells the "southern mentality."

I just wish the Wal*Mart employees could get over that final hill to become unionized, as that would take a lot of fire out of the juggernaut.

Also, WOW, all american? Most of their goods are made in china.

[eomaha]

New York Times reveals leaked memo outlining almost 500 new Walmart stores for 2006.

Above and beyond what we already know about... only an expansion of the Council Bluff's Sams Club is planned for now.

Times story: http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/busines ... nsion.html

[icejammer]

Above and beyond what we already know about... only an expansion of the Council Bluff's Sams Club is planned for now.

Looks like work is proceeding on that already.

[Coyote]

Law group opposes Papillion Wal-Mart

A group that uses zoning laws to fight large livestock confinement operations in Nebraska is joining the opposition to a Wal-Mart shopping center. The Great Plains Environmental Law Center is asking to enter the legal battle against the proposed Market Pointe shopping center just outside Papillion...

The law center describes itself as dedicated to protecting the legal rights of residents, particularly in fighting business developments and actions of local legislative bodies that residents see as harmful to their environment.

[Locke]

While it's very fashionable to hate Walmart at the moment, the real story is not so simple.

There is little dispute that Wal-Mart’s price reductions have benefited the 120 million American workers employed outside of the retail sector. Plausible estimates of the magnitude of the savings from Wal-Mart are enormous – a total of $263 billion in 2004, or $2,329 per household. Even if you grant that Wal-Mart hurts workers in the retail sector – and the evidence for this is far from clear – the magnitude of any potential harm is small in comparison. One
study, for example, found that the “Wal-Mart effect” lowered retail wages by $4.7 billion in 2000.

So, $263 billion in household savings vs $4.7 billion in retail wage losses.

And this is from a liberal think-tank, the Center for American Progress. Their report is called "WalMart: A Progressive Success Story." The conclusion: Walmart is good for the poor.

http://www.americanprogress.org/atf/cf/ ... ESSIVE.PDF

And Global Insight also recently did a study of Walmart's effects on the US economy:

Global Insight reviewed a wide range of previous studies that indicated that the efficiencies that Wal-Mart has fostered in the retail sector have led to lower prices for the U.S. consumer. These results were supported by statistical analysis which found that the expansion of Wal-Mart over the 1985 to 2004 period can be associated with a cumulative decline of 9.1% in food-at-home prices, a 4.2% decline in commodities (goods) prices, and a 3.1% decline in overall consumer prices as measured by the Consumer Price Index-All Items, which includes both goods and services.

The main driver of this impact was a 0.75% improvement in the overall efficiency of the economy. Increased capital intensity and lower import prices were secondary drivers. The 3.1% decline in the price level was partially offset by a 2.2% decline in nominal wages, so that the net effect was to increase real disposable income by 0.9% by 2004.

Sorry if this post reads like a lecture. Sure there are things Walmart should be doing to better serve their employees, and pretty stores would be nice too, but overall Walmart benefits the average American household quite a bit ($2,329 in a single year) so pretending Walmart doesn't benefit the "community" is a little unfair.

[Swift]

Yeah, but economic benefits are clearly a trade off for cultural benefits. Specifcally when Wal-Mart, Home Depot, etc. come into a market and close down all the small and historic businesses that can't compete with the low prices that wal-mart achieves by buying its goods from China.

[Locke]

That seems like an elitist point of view to me, Swift. Screw the poor saving 2 grand a year, I want a certain culture!

So much of culture comes from forcing things on people. When you give people liberty (economic and otherwise) some "culture" goes down the drain. I'll take liberty over "culture" anyday. Let people have choices, Walmart or Mom n' Pop. If Mom n' Pop go out of business, well that's an effect of economic liberty.

Plus, I'm sure some people lamented how cars ruined the culture of horses and wagons.

[Swift]

I'm sure some people lamented how cars ruined the culture of horses and wagons.

And how it ruined American politics (oil)

But seriously, I agree this isn't a black and white situation, but when you lose your local identity, who cares how much you're saving? I'm all for making money, but not the way Wal-Mart does it: Come into an area, throw down your huge cookie cutter box store that ignores any regional architectural history. Sure they save people money, but at the expense of other local business owners.

The source you sited didn't say anything about how much money is lost by the closing of other businesses by Wal-Mart. And I understand it's all economics, supply and demand, free market, etc.

But an argument that Wal-Mart benefits the poor isn't very realistic, especially if you look at the income of the people who work at Wal-Mart. Most often, they are the poor ones who the savings are supposed to be benefiting, but since their wages are lower...well you get the point. It's all debateable.

And when you throw in the size of Wal-Mart's "footprint" as well as how they shift local culture away from historic identity, then it becomes very easy to put wal-mart into the "bad" category.

[Locke]

And how it ruined American politics (oil)

Ha, well railroad companies were the equivalent before the oil companies. And the railroads built Omaha.

But an argument that Wal-Mart benefits the poor isn't very realistic, especially if you look at the income of the people who work at Wal-Mart. Most often, they are the poor ones who the savings are supposed to be benefiting, but since their wages are lower...well you get the point. It's all debateable.

Bob, all that stuff is quantified in the reports I posted. So, it is debatable, unless you're influence by the actual...facts.

[Swift]

Well this is from that very same study you posted:

If Wal-Mart were committed to the welfare of its more than 1.3 million “associates,” as it
calls its workers, then it would push to expand these public programs. Instead, Wal-Mart and the
Walton family have generally worked against the progressive issues that would benefit its
employees, including funding campaigns advocating the repeal of the estate tax. Recently, Wal-
Mart has come around to endorsing a higher minimum wage, but this limited step is outweighed
by its consistent funding for attempts to roll back progressive priorities that would benefit its
workers. Unlike support for true corporate welfare, advocating steps to make work pay would
have little impact on Wal-Mart’s shareholders or its bottom line; it could, however, make a large
difference for its employees.

[Locke]

Bob, like I said:

Sure there are things Walmart should be doing to better serve their employees, and pretty stores would be nice too, but overall Walmart benefits the average American household quite a bit ($2,329 in a single year) so pretending Walmart doesn't benefit the "community" is a little unfair.

The CAP study says the same thing. Yes, you posted a part where they said it.

[Swift]

It benefits the individual, the argument is whether or not it benefits the community.

[Locke]

Communities are made up of individuals.

[MTO]

and individuals make up a community

[Swift]

granted, but what's good for the individual won't neccesarily be good for the community.

[MTO]

True, “the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few” – south park

[omaja]

Outweigh.

[icejammer]

True, “the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few” – south park

or "Star Trek: The Wrath of Khan" for an earlier cinematic reference.

Anyway, taking a look at the Wal-Mart study, that $2,329 per household figure appears to be spread over 20 years, or about $116 per year per household. And it's based on the assumption of "what if Wal-Mart didn't exist, what would be the impacts", but doesn't look at the question that assumption just begs for - "what efficiencies/changes would other retailers have made to capture market share and how much savings would that have generated in the same 20-year period?"

Of course, Wal-Mart sponsored the study, so why would they look at that????

[michaelsjewel]

i find this discrimination based on one walmart in florida to be bogus - that doesn't happen everywhere - for goodness sake - i work for walmart and i have yet to witness any of that |expletive| you just mentioned - the story they are running now says all walmarts do that - but in reality - it's probably only a select few - it's just another ploy to tear down a business b/c it's larger than ever - kinda like the martha stewart scandal - nice they make an example of such big people -