The proposed Wal-Mart Supercenter on the north end of Bend has a ton of opposition (and folks who don’t like Wal-Mart, but don’t like the opposition), to the point where Wal-Mart had to appeal to the State Land Use Board of Appeals. The biggest roadblock was how Wal-Mart was going to handle traffic at the already clogged Cooley Rd. and Hwy. 97 intersection (their land is on that corner). What always confused me, however, is how it seemed that Wal-Mart was wholly responsible for traffic restructuring in that area, despite the other large tenants in the area and the City of Bend’s Juniper Ridge project right across the highway, which, upon completion, promises just as many traffic problems. Now that the City has its first planned tenant (the corporate headquarters for Les Schwab Tires), Wal-Mart has a legitimate beef. Is the tire giant going to have to pay to help traffic issues in the area? The City of Bend worked their tails off to get Les Schwab to move to Juniper Ridge, and (from what I can tell) is giving Les Schwab a free pass (I know Les and co’ won’t have nearly the traffic flow). From what I can tell, the City is requiring a lot more work out of Wal-Mart. Both companies are going to provide a bunch of jobs and tax dollars to the area (obviously Wal-Mart’s will be lesser paying — I won’t argue with that). But how much is the city planning on paying for improvement there versus what they’re asking of Wal-Mart and some of their preferred tenants? Yes, Wal-Mart a massive company with a buttload of money, but is it fair to pin everything on them?
Discuss.
Comments
This issue started while I was still working at KTVZ. I covered a few preliminary stories before I left town, so I’m still amazed there hasn’t been much movement forward on this thing.
Here’s what I think…it’s all politics. Nobody (not the City of Bend, ODOT, or any other agency or company) can afford to fix the traffic problems on their own. I’ve always thought it fair that if you build a business or subdivision that increases traffic in a specific area, then you should be responsible to mitigate whatever impacts you may have.
Wal-Mart, suffice it to say, will have the most impact on that area (although Lowe’s brings in a lot of traffic, too). I think you’re right, Jake. Everyone is trying to get Wal-mart, the corporate giant with lots of money, to carry the burden. Should they pay more than everyone else? Probably. But I think what’s being asked of them now is excessive. And my guess is they’ve got enough evidence to prove in court that they’re not getting a fair shake. Hence the reason some councilors are backing off a little, and even questioning the process.
Big or small, every company should get a fair shake, no matter how much you may hate them. As long as they go through the required process, then that’s all that matters.
By the way, I’m glad to say that I’m returning to Central Oregon. I’ve pretty much had it with the news business…crappy hours, working holidays, little vacation time – not to mention the stress and demands of the job. This is not a family-friendly business, folks!
I’m making a career change, and looking for jobs in PR/Marketing. I’m also going to start writing books, probably in the area of fiction. I’m a Bendite at heart, and the arid climate of the High Desert will help me dry out, and clean off some of the rust and mold that I’ve accumulated here in the Valley.
I agree. I guess that’s my biggest gripe that they’re asking WalMart to take on nearly all the costs when they’re certainly not responsible for all the traffic. A lot of it, yes, but certainly not all of it.
I suspect they used the traffic aspect because it was the kind of legal tactic they could grab onto. Flawed, yes. What about the traffic mess that Home Depot, Target, & Lowes made in that area? I hear about lots of accidents up there–I don’t shop at any of them.