Sprawled Out: The Search for Community in the American Suburb

Shoppes at Wyndham Village announces tenants

ABOVE: Downtown Greendale

BizTimes.com reports that Shoppes at Wyndham Village has the following tenants signed up:

• Aveda salon
• Ferch's Malt Shoppe & Grille
• Sport Clips
• Cousins Subs (previously announced to great fanfare)

Also noted:

Mid-America, which is handling the leasing for Wyndham Village developer Mark Carstensen Construction & Development Companies Inc., is also negotiating with a "local restaurant," which would occupy a stand-alone 7,000-square-foot building that would be built at the shopping center, Rosenfeld said.

Long rumored, the Ferch's announcement is interesting. On the one hand, hats off to Shoppes for placing a locally-owned business. On the other hand, it may be very instructive to see how the horrendous site plan at Shoppes affects an eatery that is primarily known for the "traditional, strollable" mainstreet vibe that you get at its primary location in Greendale.

The Greendale location is on a residential-type street and adjacent to a wonderful park; the Shoppes location will be adjacent to sheets of asphalt and a very busy intersection.

The "local restaurant" announcement shows some promise. Now the question is: Will they get a break on their liquor fee ala Staybridge Suites?

Couldn't even get a Jimmy Johns?

Franklin Today reports that, after a long bout of silence, the first announced tenant at Shoppes at Wyndham Village is... Cousin's Subs.

That bar sure lowered, didn't it?

The lesson here is: Build a strip mall, get strip mall shops. Or "shoppes," as the case may be.

Destroying from within: The "ironic appointment" in Franklin

I knew the name was familiar; it took only a moment or two to find out why.

On the Common Council agenda for tonight, the mayor has nominated one Diane Baranowski for a seat on the much-hobbled Environmental Commission.

A nomination, it appears, executed in the long tradition of destroying from within those institutions deemed unnecessary or averse to Those Who Matter (in this case, read: developers).

The so-called "ironic appointment."

Ronald Reagan's handlers worried that if it named competent people to run "objectionable" agencies, its actions might be interpreted by Those Who Matter as sanctioning the regulatory enterprise. That's how the neophyte Colorado state legislator Anne Gorsuch was put in charge of the Environmental Protection Agency. And she gutted it from within.

George W. Bush nominates UN denouncer John Bolton in 2005 as our ambassador to the UN.

Bush's Department of Labor is run by self-admitted haters of labor. They go so far as to agree to give Wal-Mart a fifteen-day notice before "investigating" it for any possible child labor violations.

And here in Franklin, the Common Council is being asked to approve the appointment of a woman who wrote the note below - cc'ed to the mayor - to blogger Greg Kowalski (who has an entry about the situation as well) while he was attempting to get even cosmetic improvements made to the Target Store in the Parking Lots Shoppes at Wyndham Village.

Ms. Baranowski has every right to her opinion, and I'm sure she is well-intentioned. However, do the sentiments below sound like those of a person who is anxious to help Franklin remain vigilant regarding environmental impacts? Does this sound like the attitude of a person who is busy reading whatever she can on "green" issues, both pro and con? Think she'll be anxious to head up a subcommittee to look into alternate parking configurations or green roofs (to quote Ms. Baranowski: "UNDERGROUND PARKING - Are you NUTS? A "GREEN" ROOF - same!")?

No. It sounds like someone who is on Mark Carstensen's and Target Corporate's Christmas card list. And the appointment smells to high heaven like a concession to one or both of those entities.

I serve on the relatively low-impact Economic Development Commission, having been nominated for the position by Mayor Taylor; Plan Commission was off-limits to me, evidently. Both myself and all the citizen commissions are belittled by a manuever this cynical. 

Will someone read the letter below into the record before the council votes?

----- Original Message -----

From: Diane Baranowski
To: franklinblog@gmail.com

Cc: ttaylor31@wi.rr.com

Sent: Friday, August 03, 2007 3:52 PM

Subject: Petition

I apologize for the previous signatures on the on-line petition. Later in this email, I will explain how that happened.

 

I do NOT endorse this protest petition or it's position statement in any way, shape or form. I'd be curious to know where you live or what your REAL motive might be, despite the named one. Frankly, if you lived in Wyndham Hills, I could see that the "demands" that you have made are more for your own self interest than anything else. 

 

Honestly, it's people like you and others who sign your petition who essentially force GOOD developers to look elsewhere without even CONSIDERING a possible site in Franklin. They're not going to jump through your suggested ridiculous hoops! UNDERGROUND PARKING - Are you NUTS? A "GREEN" ROOF - same! Remember that these companies could have brought employment opportunities with them if they had been welcomed to Franklin. 

 

Is it possible that with this nonsense, you're attempting to make a "name" for yourself so that when your want to run for public office, you'll be a known entity? Well, guess what? Most any constituency will know by then that your ideas are foolish!

 

Get off of this "rant" of yours regarding Target and help to BRING them and other good developments TO Franklin. This city needs commercial development. Are you (or your parents) and whomever your signers are, so happy with their tax bills that they can afford to join you as you push Target out? From this point forward, developers will simply skip Franklin on their lists of possible building sites if you pull this off - LOL!

 

Not surprisingly, your signature process is misleading. The request to sign the petition includes 2 little carrots or whatever they're called. These symbols seem to indicate that on the next page, one could actually sign when you are actually signing on the first page. Shame on you! I personally do not want my name on any petition of yours. If I learn that my signature is being used, despite my intention not to have it appear, there will be hell to pay!

 

By the way, petitions signed "anonymous" would not be proper and certainly would not be considered as a valid signature by ANYONE. What are you going to do when you present this petition? Would you indicate that you got a certain number of signatures and not disclose that some of them were signed "anonymous"? I'm going to keep you honest in this petition drive. Given your whole process, I'm going to make sure that all signatures are proper. I figure that Target officials will want to see them. I WANT Target here and I know that Mark Carstensen will do an amazing job of developing the site at HWY 100 and Drexel!

 

I'm going to the Target corporate website right now and hope that they have a "contact us" option that I can use. I've got a lot to say to them.   

New crisis means new rules for community development

 As giant chains close locations en masse (and almost arbitrarily), and mall developers declare bankruptcy, we're reminded once again why locally-owned, locally supported businesses are important.

Tumbleweeds Restaurants were "back on the growth track" a couple years ago. Now the Wisconsin locations - including the Franklin location, which seemed to be popular - have abruptly closed. Did it matter that business was good at the Franklin location? Not a whit to a franchise; the Excel spread sheet tells the corporate office what to close without regard to local conditions.

Woe be to the city that places too much trust on big chain restaurants and retailers without encouraging a "deep economy" of locally owned businesses. This will be something I'll attempt to emphasize for as long as they let me serve on the Economic Development Commission - - you'll see more on the topic here in coming weeks, as my first meeting with the Commission (which I will write about in the very near future) did not seem to address that issue.

Meanwhile, we await the tenant announcements for Shoppes at Wyndham Village (aka The Target Center); will there be incentives for local businesses, or is it a Starbucks-only zone?

New crisis, in commercial real estate, looms - Economy in Turmoil- msnbc.com

Evil Developer responds to MJS story on Fountains of Franklin

Developer Dave Hintzman, he of Fountains of Franklin, learned in a recent Milwaukee Journal Sentinel story that he is an evil developer (he may even have awoken this morning to find that he now has a handlebar mustache perfect for twirling whilst conniving against the elderly).

Snidely Whiplash Hintzman sent the following email to local bloggers, which I post in its entirety:

Dear Franklin bloggers,
 
After reviewing the opinions of some of your blogs, and those who posted comments, I feel compelled to respond to the insinuations made against our project.  You have been misinformed.
 
Yesterday's Journal Sentinel story was not a true, accurate article.  Instead, it was an obvious attempt to manufacture a storyline that is nothing short of "if it bleeds, it reads."  Given the Journal Sentinel's decrease in revenue, readership, and advertising, it appears this reporter wanted to create a more interesting story.

1. Our original (or current) plan did/does not include any other property.  However, when the area was being rezoned, the Plan Commission expected us to create a conceptual plan including all of the commercial properties of the area.  Afterwards, I spoke with the Sendik's developer and the owner of Andy's gas station to see if they were interested in marketing the area under the brand name of Fountains of Franklin (similar to what the cities of Oak Creek & Franklin were doing with "Boomgaard").
2. I do not want nor will not purchase our neighbor's property now or in the future.  The entire Journal Sentinel story revolved around this premise.
3. I do not support, nor have I ever heard of anyone supporting the idea to "kick the Foxes out of their home."  I have been neighbors to the Foxes since 1999, and feel that we've shared a positive and healthy relationship.  We bought ten acres from our neighbor in 2005 to create a development and named the road in honor of their daughter, as this was very important to them.  Later, a nearby park was named after her.  The Foxes have shared with us that they were very happy to work with us on that project.
4. We do not consider the Target center as competition.  First, a commercial broker explained to us that it is in a different market area.  Second, that area has a different level of roadway access and demographics.  Third, that project contains the second largest discount retailer in the world.  Mark Carstensen is a very successful businessman and he is building a different project than ours.  I'm only surprised that Mark Carstensen chooses to visit our neighbor so frequently.
5. We were aware of our neighbor's business activities prior to the beginning of our project.  We designed a full and mature landscape buffer to benefit both properties.  However, when desired national businesses are reluctant to locate in a community that doesn't enforce all of their Ordinances, it was our responsibility to address their concerns.  We were unaware, as I believe the city was, that our neighbor is operating multiple businesses unlawfully and has multiple zoning violations.  This is a reasonable concern for any neighbor.
6. Our neighbor has chosen to not comply with the laws of the city originally or to date.  A few months ago, our neighbors told me they intentionally did not fulfill their responsibilities or city agreements because it would cost them money and their taxes would increase dramatically.  Most people are not aware that the city provided multiple warning letters in efforts to help get them in compliance.  Afterwards, the city offered a clear path of compliance without any penalties or fines, which included an additional year to cure their deficiencies to fulfill their responsibilies and agreements with the city.  Mr. Fox declined the goodwill offer and threatened a lawsuit against the city with two different attorneys.
7. The last time we talked to our neighbors, they told us to send over a "multi-multimillionaire" if we found one.  It is our understanding that they have been offered almost $3,000,000 for a property that's worth much less than $2,000,000. Since it has been brought to my attention that the Foxes bought their property for $1.00 (one dollar), it appears they are “at the right place at the right time.”
8. The city has now confirmed that the outdoor storage, the boats and RVs, will have to go. We as a neighbor, have a reasonable concern why this issue has not been enforced to date.

I trust that you will find the above accurate and truthful information beneficial.
 
Thank you,
 
David Hintzman
President
Equitable Development, LLC

We are in the dark ages of home construction, part 2

"We love the suburbs for the privacy."

ABOVE: McMansion bedroom windows peek up over the outbuildings of Shoppes at Wyndham Village.

Growing pains: Is Franklin getting too big to selectively enforce ordinances?

This will be the background post, with more to follow.

This past Tuesday's Franklin Common Council meeting focused on a letter written by Lyle Sohns, 5th district alderman, to Mayor Tom Taylor regarding what he alleges is the city's willingness to ignore ordinance violations on the Fox property, which bisects the area where developers are struggling to create a cohesive commercial site called Fountains of Franklin. Trouble is, as long as the Foxes refuse to sell their property, the Fountains of Franklin site will be hopelessly severed in two with Rawson Avenue on one side and a residential subdivision on the other; both immovable objects.

As per typical oddball suburban road plans, there is no way, given the Fox property's location, to move from one end of the proposed F of F site to the other without getting back out onto Rawson and driving the 500 yards-or-so. Wonderful - see why good master planning is important?

It's my understanding that various financial offers have been made to the Foxes by the developer to purchase the property, but the Foxes prefer not to sell. You can imagine the developer's frustration.

Why not sell? It's not for us to judge why people grow attached to a certain location, but the Foxes apparently want to stay put on a strip of land that abuts a road thickly populated with noisy, dusty dump-truck traffic from the quarry across the street. To their left and right will soon be commercial development of one sort or another that does not compliment their current storage and concrete business (and vice-versa).

Add to this stew a few visits to the Foxes from a competing developer with a competing commercial development in Shoppes at Wyndham Village (and who, ironically, maneuvered the city into a similar "don't-take-our-land" position and is responsible for the fact that there is a house (!) right behind the Target loading dock. Well played, Mr. Carstensen!)

Now we come to find out that the Foxes have been taking certain liberties - - unknowingly, I assume - -  with their property that conflict with local ordinances, and these ordinances have not been enforced, hence the letter from alderman Sohns to the mayor. Three businesses - a concrete company, mini-warehousing, and outdoor storage - are operated on the property. Two out of three of the businesses have never been approved; sort of a "look the other way" situation, because, after all, Franklin was but a small town back in 1980 when the unapproved businesses began operation.

During the public comment period at Tuesday's Common Council meeting, the Foxes - - clearly distraught - - expressed their fear and confusion over the matter. You'd have to be made of stone not to empathize with them; I sincerely doubt they ever consciously set out to pull the wool over the city's eyes. (In their own words; "We're not developers.") They say they had a lawyer involved but have since dropped him or her as the lawyer "seemed to only make things worse and more confusing for us."

So who's to blame for their predicament? And, make no mistake, it very definitely is a predicament if Franklin hopes to enforce any other ordinance with any other business or homeowner. Everybody's watching.

More later. In the meantime, listen to meeting podcasts at Janet Evans' Righty Blog (where you will hear the phrase "emminent domain" for no reason I can discern).

Modern street "design": Trapping the elderly, pre-teens and differently-abled in their homes

If we keep building illogical roads and creating "single purpose pods" the way we currently so here in Franklin, pray each night that you never get too old and/or infirm to drive a vehicle.

Sidewalks are a luxury?

Curved roads built for unimpeded speed in residential neighborhoods? 

Complaints that demonstrably speed-reducing, safety-increasing roundabouts are "confusing" (i.e. "impede my speed")?

Lack of pedestrian connectivity between something so basic as a high school and the neighborhoods it serves?

Wonderful recreational trails - - that lead nowhere and require a parking lot?

A well-used library with nothing commercially useful within walking distance?

Over-burdened arterial streets that create a near-insurmountable barrier to even the most hardy of walkers and bicyclists - -  not to mention children and adolescents who desire a bit of non-vehicular freedom - - that the city seeks to widen further?

A "city civic center district" that allowed a strip mall and enormous parking lot to virtually eliminate non-vehicular access and any sense of useful civic public space?

I don't see people - or businesses - tripping over themselves to move to a community that is so short-sighted. It's time for a change.

Modern American street systems create insurmountable problems for some of the nation's elderly. Daniel M. Cary tells of an episode that took place in Stuart, Florida. His wife was standing in line at a supermarket checkout when she noticed that the elderly woman in front of her seemed upset. The elderly woman fumbled with her purse and dropped her keys. When Mrs. Cary offered to help, it was as if an emotional dam broke loose. The elderly woman let out that she was nervous because tomorrow she had to take a test to have her driver's license renewed. "If I fail, I don't know what I'm going to do," the woman said. "I won't even be able to drive to the grocery store. My husband died several years ago. I've been living in the same house for twenty years. I don't want to move." The woman's independence and ability to remain in familiar surroundings were in jeopardy.

- A Better Place to Live: Reshaping the American Suburb, by Philip Langdon

Now the mainstream takes note: Reinvent America's suburbs - USATODAY.com

 

ABOVE: Missed opportunity - - where Franklin's city center could have been; instead, a monument to unbridled gas consumption and the now-passed era of "happy motoring."

Welcome to the mainstream: The cover of yesterday's USA Today features what can only be called The New Reality - - at the 11th hour. How long until cities change their approach to developers so that we can get them in line with The New Reality while they continue to desire quick payoffs based on the Old Paradigm? 

Here in Franklin, we have yet to see a developer take seriously any aspect of traditional neighborhood development, city center design, sustainable development, or walkable community planning in their projects. It's been business as usual - - for which certain developers expect honors and tributes on top of their windfall profits.

I recall TWO speakers at the opening of the Shoppes at Wyndham Village's Sendik's actually saluting developer "Mark Carstensen's vision of Franklin"  - - a truly surreal concept, to say the least. Any community that abdicates its fate and vision to a modern developer will get exactly what it deserves - - as we did in the abysmal Target strip mall (with bonus single family house built in back!).

And this is not the fault of the developer (well, except in this case for the single family house trick); they are profit-based entities that operate under a quite different set of strictures and requirements than does a community that has to think about how various city componants will work together in the long term. This is why a strong, independant Plan Commission is absolutely vital, and it's why alderman Steve Taylor's recent call for a close look at the role of Franklin's Plan Commission - - one that has been made systematically weaker and weaker - - will be covered here in great detail.

A survey done this month by the (sprawl-loving) National Association of Home Builders (included with the USA TODAY story) found that developers are slow to react and change their business plans.

Among the sentiments from the 380 who responded to multiple choices, 28% said they would build smaller homes in the suburbs; 25% would build smaller homes closer to cities; 14% would build homes on smaller lots close to the city; 10% said homes on smaller lots in the suburbs.

"But 51% said they have no change in plans," says Gopal Ahluwalia, staff vice president for research. "This is just the beginning. More and more people will come to realize that what we're doing is not working."

It will take time, he adds. "There are 80 million single-family homes in the country, and 75 million are owner-occupied. People are not going to abandon them or convert them into two-family homes," he says.

From USATODAY.com:

Gas prices drive push to reinvent America's suburbs

By Haya El Nasser, USA TODAY

MARICOPA, Ariz. — Mayor Tony Smith proudly waves a thank-you letter from a major builder telling him that no city has ever reached out to him in his 30-year career the way Maricopa did.

What Maricopa has been doing is unusual, especially for a distant suburb. This city about 35 miles south of Phoenix is asking builders not to develop just isolated subdivisions behind walls, but whole communities that encourage walking by including stores, schools and services nearby.

"The people of Maricopa don't want to be a bedroom community, a city of rooftops," Smith says. "They want a self-sustained community."

URBAN DESIGN: Large cities are rethinking growth patterns, too

HEALTH BENEFITS: Neighborhood layouts can improve residents' behavior

Especially today. As gas prices hover around $4 a gallon, the nation's far-flung suburbs — which have boomed because they could provide larger homes at cheaper prices to those willing to drive farther — are losing their appeal.

Soaring energy costs and the foreclosure epidemic have jolted many Americans into realizing that their lifestyles are at risk. For many, ever-lengthening commutes in the search for affordable homes no longer make financial sense.

In Maricopa and elsewhere, a movement is underway to transform suburbs from bedroom communities that sprang up during an era of cheap gasoline to lively, more cosmopolitan places that mix houses with jobs, shops, restaurants, colleges and entertainment.

Suburbs on the far edge of metro areas are turning aside strip malls and creating new downtowns and neighborhoods that favor pedestrians. They're trying to attract more employers and services such as hospitals, colleges and small airports.

The appeal of urbanism is spreading to far suburbs such as Rancho Cucamonga, Calif.(about 42 miles east of Los Angeles), and Huntersville, N.C., about 16 miles north of Charlotte. Centers that combine residential, retail, office and entertainment are becoming popular far from urban centers.

Small historic towns on the edge of metropolitan areas such as Brighton, Colo., northeast of Denver, and Plainfield, Ill., southwest of Chicago, are emphasizing their Main Streets and history to provide a sense of community outside the walls of sprawling subdivisions.

Mass transit is being embraced by towns that wouldn't have been born without the automobile. Here in Maricopa, the city introduced bus service to Phoenix and Tempe this year, providing the first mass transit alternative to residents, many of whom commute about 35 miles to Phoenix.

Such changes could have a profound effect on the way the nation develops as it prepares to absorb an estimated 100 million more people by about 2040.

The scent of change is in the air in Maricopa, even in the way city officials talk. Words such as "bedroom community" have become dirty words. "Green," "sustainable," "walkable," "mass transit," "conservation," "open space" and "energy-efficient" punctuate the suburban dialogue.

"Absolutely, suburbs are not going to go away," says David Goldberg, spokesman for Smart Growth America, a national coalition of groups pushing for conservation and sustainable growth. "But the math is becoming very clear."

Until now, people were willing to drive increasingly far for a home they could afford. "Drive-till-you-qualify collapsed," Goldberg says. "It's done. It's not going to work as a housing strategy anymore."

Living costs soar

In the past year, as gas prices skyrocketed, the housing bubble burst and transit ridership soared, the cost of living farther out for many Americans went from manageable to pricey.

An analysis of real estate data by Fiserv Lending Solutions shows that home prices have fallen more in towns and neighborhoods far from urban centers than in close-in suburbs.

Developers traditionally have flocked to fields at the edge of metro areas to avoid the stricter zoning rules and higher fees they face in older, more densely populated communities. But that could be changing.

"The trends that pushed housing demand toward distant suburbs and rural areas were not sustainable," says David Stiff, chief economist at Fiserv. "The problem is that it can be two, three, four times as expensive to develop in close-in neighborhoods vs. outlying neighborhoods, if there's any space at all."

If gas prices continue to climb or government provides incentives to build more densely and closer in, development patterns should evolve, planners say.

"People respond to economic incentives," Stiff says. "Reducing commuting costs, trying to be more environmentally conscious and trying to find the cheapest housing affect decisions simultaneously."

"We're sort of stuck with retrofitting the suburbs," says Scott Bernstein, head of the Center for Neighborhood Technology, which for years has urged that transportation costs be a criterion for mortgage qualification. "That's not all that bad. … There's nothing like a crisis to get people to try something."

Fresh ideas about development are spreading. A new website gives "walk" scores for more than 2,500 neighborhoods in the 40 largest cities (walkscore.com). Bernstein's group publishes a housing and transportation affordability index for 52 metropolitan areas (htaindex.cnt.org/).

Kenneth Himmel says now is "the perfect moment to be doing everything we're talking about."

The developer of the Reston Town Center in Virginia, the Time Warner Center in New York and City Place in West Palm Beach, Fla., says: "Some people will say, 'For $300,000 to $325,000, what are my options to live closer?' Maybe it's a smaller home. … Do they want to drive or do they want to be five or 10 minutes from their office? People will make the trade."

The new reality

The Phoenix area is legendary for sprawl. The city alone covers 517 square miles. Surrounding it is 14,000 square miles (twice the size of New Jersey) of desert dotted by seas of rooftops.

Foreclosures have hit the region hard — more than 5,500 the first six months of this year. Home construction permits have slowed by more than half in many communities. Still, building crews are grading tracts of land far from downtown.

Buckeye, more than 30 miles west of Phoenix, and Maricopa, a similar distance to the south, are the suburbs that have the highest number of new single-family home permits.

It's there that the seeds of change are taking root.

"We've got to get jobs to keep people from driving," says Buckeye Mayor Jackie Meck, who worries that gas "could easily go to $8, $10" a gallon.

Meck and town manager Jeanine Guy say Buckeye's goal was never to be a bedroom community but a gateway to California and the Pacific Rim. Already, developers of a master-planned community on 1,100 acres 30 miles beyond Buckeye — 60 miles from Phoenix — are rethinking their project because of fuel costs. They want to turn it into a distribution center that would cut gas costs for truckers from the West who are delivering goods to the Phoenix area.

In Maricopa, the city for the first time is encouraging builders to create sustainable communities that use alternative forms of energy or are near jobs, goods and services. Already, the city is home to Arizona's first ethanol plant and a facility that uses recycled water to flush toilets. And there are the commuter buses to downtown Phoenix and Tempe.

When gas prices inched toward $4 a gallon, Donna Nance bemoaned her 40-mile, one-way commute to work her job as the court clerk in downtown Phoenix. Gas would now cost her $60 a week, a blow for a single mom who had moved here to get a house at a better price.

She considered moving closer, at the risk of giving up her three-bedroom, single-family home and might have done it if Maricopa had not introduced Phoenix-bound commuter buses in April. Nance, 43, now drives 7 miles to the bus stop and enjoys the ride. Even if gas prices keep climbing, Nance says she has no reason to leave.

"We hit a sweet spot starting a transit program here," Mayor Smith says.

It's a reflection of how some suburbs are trying to replace their "middle of nowhere" image with a "there." "Maybe gas drops to $3 a gallon and people will say we don't need to do this anymore," says Guy, the Buckeye town manager. "We do."

You can't buy a Batmobile at Sendik's.

First impression of the new Shoppes at Wyndham Village Target?

Vast.

Second impression: There sure are a lot of groceries in here. A lot.

Third impression: Sure would hate to try to run a grocery business next door to this monster.

And didn't the representative from Target say, many months ago (September 6, 2007, in fact), that Target had no plans to have a wine selection?

UPDATE and CLARIFICATION: After digging up the tape of that meeting, I heard commissioner Shari Hanneman voice her concern that she'd been to a Target in Roscoe, Illinois "and I was so surprised to see a liquor department. I just want to be clear for the record; Will this particular Target or will it not have a liquor department?"

The answer was fairly long winded. "It's a lot based on the policies of the locale. It's state by state. The SuperTargets, go in ... typically, ask for the wine and spirits. You know, they typically have the beer, the full selection. The newer general merchandise stores these days like to sell wine, but it does depend on the jurisdiction and that conditional use, if liquor is a separate entitlement or separate conditional use. It would be in this store if.. it would be the wine is what would be asked for."

Most assumed that Target would not get a conditional use, being that Sendik's was right next door.

Surprise: Target has a pretty darn substantial wine, liquor and beer selection. They got their license and/or conditional use.

Higher end house brands? Tons.

 

 

Archer Farms is a Target house brand that's specifically designed and marketed to appeal to the sorts of people who shop at or aspire to places like .....

 

See where this is going?

Because here's the thing: You can't buy a Batmobile at Sendik's.

This morning I ran into some friends who stopped at the new Target on their way to the Wisconsin Dells. They needed some road food, snacks, water, etc. Their money went to Target; they never even considered the neighboring Sendik's. Because they figured they could pick up some sunscreen as well; why split the trip?

I stopped at Target because it was opening day, but also because I really wanted that Hot Wheels '60s-era Batmobile that just came out (lost my childhood Corgi version in the flood). I ended up getting some cereal and a Starbucks coffee at the same time. Didn't go near Sendik's - - you can't get a Batmobile there, you know. (Nor can you loiter in an aisle examining dozens of varieties of pens, another favorite pastime of mine.)

Don't think this is significant? Think this is all "great competition?" Then you haven't studied closely the reasons people shop where they shop and buy what they buy. As it happens, I've spent twenty years of my life squandering brain cells on exactly those questions. I'm good enough at it by now that companies regularly pay me decent money to advise them on those exact issues. (Heck, spend a weekend with a book and you'll start to get the picture very quickly. Just don't horn in on my client base).

Grocery stores like Sendik's don't make their real nut on you going in and getting exactly what's on your list. The real money is in incidentals that you suddenly decide you need while you're there - - and that's where the higher mark-up is. On everything else, they have to remain competitive and therefor maintain thinner - - sometimes murderously thin - - margins.

Example: Computer nerds and audio jocks know that you should never buy cables or cords at Best Buy. A nominal length of USB or ethernet line is just outrageously expensive there (recent example from The Consumerist website: Three generic 6-foot optical audio cables from online retailer Monoprice.com for $10.79, shipped. Same product from Best Buy [the cheaper, Acoustic Research brand], shipped price was $97.47 for three).

But Best Buy still manages to make really big money on high mark-up cords because it's an incidental purchase made while picking up a DVD player or iPod. (Best Buy managers encourage their no-commission floor sales crew to push the cables, of course; they sold my mom a $100 cord she could have gotten at Radio Shack for $5.99). And, you guessed it, they don't make much  - - if anything - - on the sale of that DVD player; it's the cables that excite the Best Buy bean counters.

Bottom line: We are about to watch a seasoned nation-wide predator slowly and efficiently absorb its locally-owned prey over the course of a couple years; it has overtly configured itself as if Sendik's does not exist, much less live right next door.

And - - given the current state of the economy for smaller businesses - - you have to wonder if any additional tenants are going to be anxious to consider Shoppes at Wyndham Village, a place where they would have to coexist uncomfortably close to a formidable one-stop-for-everything big box that has demonstrated a distinct lack of regard for its nominal co-anchor and, furthermore, controls the entire development. (See also: Strip Mall Vacancy Rate Increases Sharply in Q2.)

By the way, you can't get a GI Joe at Sendik's either ...