That every WalMart hurts/harms the area they land in, is undisputable. The only person that benefits, is Sam Walton Jr.

I can already find bargain-basement polyester pants in a dozen stores in town, including dirt-cheap versions at any of our handy "vintage" stores.

Why, except that it will by-design give WallyWorld a monopoly on the selling of certain/most goods, does CU need more than one WalMart! We need three!? Give me a break!

And if the new WalMart sells pizza and beer, it'll also mean the crippling or death of the two or three large grocery stores in Urbana.

We're going to wake up folks, and there won't be anywhere else to shop. That's hardly a "benefit", in my book.

Who would drive up to North Prospect to get school supplies now? You can get all the school supplies you want between campustown (TIS, IUB, Folletts) and Schnuck's already. If you're after more esoteric art supplies, there's Art Coop right on Green.

That said, I was just at the planning commission meeting tonight, and the room was packed with people who all spoke against the proposed plat. Quite a few of them digressed into comments about Wal-Mart in particular, but there was plenty of sentiment against having big box retail there generally. Many of those who are against the plat live near the property and are worried about drainage and excess light pollution problems, while others (myself included) simply feel that we'd be better off with business developing elsewhere - either reuse existing abandoned commercial sites, or if that is not feasible, stick with the ORIGINAL big business/strip mall plan for the Farm'n'Fleet area. There is no sense having two - a single development will allow economies of scale in extending the various services a development like that is going to need.

It is true that the owner of the land is free to sell to whomever he wishes. However, the buyer must conform to the zoning and plat for the land. If the city doesn't wish to see big box retail on that location, they don't need to zone or plat for such use. They cannot say "No Wal-Mart," but they certainly can say "no big box retail AT THIS TIME."

They have currently changed the zoning from industrial to commercial (B-3, I believe). Several people expressed wishes to have it rezoned. The plat is not yet approved - it seems the main technical issue is one of drainage. If the plat is not approved, Wal-Mart (or similar sized stores) would be unable to go in. As far as I've heard, there are no other interested parties. The plat calls for breaking the land into 7 parcels (some of them quite odd shaped) but only developing the parcel that Wal-Mart is interested in.

In better news, apparently Bergner's has finally given up sitting on their lease in Lincoln Square. Woo hoo!

People find it so much of a hassle to drive "all the way" to N. Prospect to go to a Menard's, a Lowe's, a Meijer? Well, I hate to be the one to break it to you, but stores of that size are designed to serve markets of (drum roll please...) 500,000 people. Yes, you heard me right. That is more people than live in the CU metro area, because they hope to suck in people from Bloomington and Danville.

What that means is, they're not designed to be built on every street corner or every intersection of state highways. When they build that close, they cannibalize their own business. So then, why DOES WalMart want to build a store out on High Cross Road?

Of course Wal-Mart can afford to cannibalize their own business, because they are the largest corporation in the United States. You will notice that there is NOT a second Meijer's in the area. Why? Contrary to popular folklore, it wasn't Urbana that "kicked them out" - just like the WalMart plan, once a site is zoned for big box stores, the city cannot deny a particular tenant - but because the company realized that they would be cannibalizing the N. Prospect store, and it would be more profitable to try and break into the Chicago market, which is virgin territory for them.

Current big-box retail strategy has nothing to do with serving markets. Rather, the game (for all chains, not only WalMart) is all about maximizing market share under conditions of retail glut. We have a serious oversupply problem - put bluntly, in an economy built around mass consumption, there are too many products for sale.

With everyone consuming completely freely, no limits to speak of, there is too much stuff. Demand is satiated. Naturally, companies are desperately trying to spark additional demand, which is why you see advertising plastered on every conceivable surface and blasting from every broadcast outlet, but it is not enough. Not all the stuff will be bought.

The rational decision for any given chain is, therefore, to try and make sure that THEY are not the chain that is left holding the bag of unsold goods. How do they do this? There are a few basic ways:

• price competition - undersell the other competitors
• competition elimination - buy or combine with the big ones, kill the little ones
• gain weight and clout - create "chains of chains" that can keep competitors out of given locations

• outsource labor to cheap foreign countries
• pressure any remaining local suppliers to cut prices or lose contract (mainly this is WalMart, they are the only place large enough)
• make the goods shoddier - bonus is you need to buy more often!
• automate, automate, automate - requiring larger factory lines
• expand the size of both the factories and the stores to get economies of scale

Yep, it's a quite beautiful example of a vicious cycle.

We are seeing these steps implemented in sprawl strip malls across the US. The market share battle is on. WalMart, being the largest corporation in the US, can afford to cannibalize itself in the fight to get the brass ring. That is why they are willing to have three (count 'em folks, THREE) WalMarts in CU. Meijer is not able to cannibalize to that level, and so WalMart will increase its advantage as they open more outlets.

This cycle is also the reason why there will not be a chain supermarket in campustown - in order to compete on this level, and compete with WalMart, supermarkets no longer consider stores less than 60,000 square feet, unless they are located in a "highly urban" area. Given the short drive time to N. Prospect (the previous poster notwithstanding) this is not considered such an area. That's why the smaller supermarkets are all the older ones. This cycle is also why "a large national clothing chain" did not move into the "styrofoam palace" next to Follett's in campustown. Old Navy was wooed, but they will not build stores in strip malls that are not next to their allied chain (Linens'n'Things I believe, - whatever is next to their current store) and so they went up to N. Prospect where the allied stores could own the entire strip.

But eventually some chains will win. At that point, there will be no further need for all the excess stores, both the "loser" stores and the extra, cannibalizing "winner" stores. Thus, they will close. Meanwhile, the smaller downtown stores are mostly gone, and will take a while for them to recover and serve the newly deserted areas. Perhaps they will recover, and the cycle will resume. But what has been lost in the process?

It's not just about WalMart. It's the entire system. The people running the stores, the people running the factories, they're all running for their survival caught up in that system. All of the above has been detailed in various issues of Business Week and Fortune. It's broken.

But, as far as I'm concerned, if they are going to insist there be strip mall sprawl in Urbana, they oughta keep it all up by Farm'n'Fleet as they originally planned.