@SPAM+++++++++ RE: [Vision2020] NFWF and Wal-Mart
Jeff Harkins
jeffh at moscow.com
Mon Feb 27 15:34:09 PST 2006
Hi Ron,
That sounds like a building code standards
issue. Consequently, I am skeptical of that
architect's information. I suspect the architect
is sour because WM does their own design work -
and they aren't exactly beautiful
structures. But they are efficient. On the
positive note, WM has introduced some new designs
for their SC's. The photos that I have seen
present the structures as attractive and as I am
advised, can be tailored to fit a design form -
perhaps eclectic NW - like Moses Lake or Othello or Plummer!
At 02:50 PM 2/27/2006, you wrote:
>I was told by an architect that the "big boxes", Wal-Mart in particular, are
>built to rock-bottom standards, and after about ten years all the
>mechnical/electrical systems have crapped out. It's cheaper to bulldoze them
>and start over.
>
>**********************************************
>Ron Force Moscow ID USA
>rforce at moscow.com
>**********************************************
>
>Phil,
> I agree with you on this one, especially when it concerns big box stores,
>industrial facilities, or warehouses that a remediation plan should be in
>place as part of the original development plan. Heck driving around
>Fairbanks there are three large empty big box stores, complete with acres of
>parking, that need cleaning up and redeveloped. The former stores, in all
>three cases, were sold to a third party "developer" who swore up and down he
>was going to get rich off of redeveloping the former K-Mart (or what have
>you) and then found out that due to environmental liabilities the place
>cannot be re-developed. That leaves the local government (that assumes the
>site after tax foreclosure) with the task of finding grant money from the
>EPA to complete a site assessment, then demolition, and finally cleanup.
>Corporate American is far too willing to shut down and move without facing
>the true cost of their actions.
>Perhaps Moscow (or Fairbanks in my case) should require a redevelopment plan
>and bond in place as part of the conditional use permit. If Wal-Mart were
>to agree to a redevelopment plan and bond then maybe a lot of concerns can
>be addressed. Heck, once Wal-Mart moves to either Pullman or the east side
>of Moscow, suddenly there will be several acres of abandoned building and
>parking lot sitting at the western edge of Moscow. The current Moscow
>Wal-Mart is only 12 years old, what a waste of really nice land that will
>soon be.
>
>Chris
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Mark Solomon [mailto:msolomon at moscow.com]
>Sent: Monday, February 27, 2006 11:54 AM
>To: Phil Nisbet; cstorhok at co.fairbanks.ak.us; vision2020 at moscow.com
>Subject: Re: [Vision2020] NFWF and Wal-Mart
>
>Phil,
>
>You radical! Developers required to mitigate the
>impacts of development! Watch what you say.. the
>next thing you know you'll have a bill named
>after you in the Idaho Legislature making sure
>that the right of developers to develop shall not
>be controlled by local government outside the
>authorities granted under the Local Land Use
>Planning Act. I think I've got at least three of
>those to my dubious credit so far.
>
>Mark
>
>At 12:41 PM -0800 2/27/06, Phil Nisbet wrote:
> >Mark
> >
> >I still call it Greenmailing, but I suppose that
> >Greenwashing makes it a little more acceptable
> >to some. Its still part of the unlevel playing
> >field that Walmart seeks to create.
> >
> >When local businesses and resource business do
> >mitigation for acrages, we do so on the basis of
> >functionality, which is actually most often a
> >lot more than acre for acre. Wetlands
> >mitigation is most often 2-3 to one for
> >distrubed lands. Riparian mitigation on a
> >functionality basis is most often 2:1. In my
> >career in mining, the ratio for lands which I
> >have disturbed in explortation or development to
> >lands reclaimed has averaged 2.2 acres reclaimed
> >for each one disturbed.
> >
> >One of the biggest deals in the environmental
> >mitigation process is selection of lands for
> >habitat mitigation and assigning functionality
> >parameters. I think you can recall some of the
> >big meetings on the Beartrack Mine in trying to
> >establish functional values for riparian
> >restoration versus created wetlands.
> >
> >So Wally World making some sort of claim to fame
> >for a 1:1 is hardly generous and as you note is
> >underfunded. Further, your figure should
> >reflect what other industry in the West does, so
> >perhaps coubling your fogure would more
> >accurately reflect ;what they should be doing in
> >terms of mitigatory measures.
> >
> >It has always bugged the heck out of me that
> >development projects from Moscow to Jackson Hole
> >never have reclaimation plans and never are
> >forced to do functional mitigation that mines
> >take as a matter of course in our business.
> >Once a shopping center or a housing development
> >is put in place, it will never be anything else,
> >but they are never required to mitigate that. A
> >mine will end up reclaimed in this day and age
> >and will not simply reclaim, but will compensate
> >for lose of functionality during the mining
> >process and require interum reclamation during
> >mining as well. It used to crack me up talking
> >to old Phil Hocker who as a developer had wiped
> >out 900 acres of wintrer elk habitat in Jackson
> >without ever doing an ounce of reclamation or
> >mitigation for his destruction and hear him
> >gross about mines.
> >
> >Maybe its time to require developers to do mitigation.
> >
> >Phil Nisbet
> >
> >>From: Mark Solomon <msolomon at moscow.com>
> >>To: Chris Storhok <cstorhok at co.fairbanks.ak.us>,
> >>"'vision2020 at moscow.com'" <vision2020 at moscow.com>
> >>Subject: Re: [Vision2020] NFWF and Wal-Mart
> >>Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2006 12:01:26 -0800
> >>
> >>Hi Chris,
> >>A great example of "green-washing" -- in this
> >>instance the devil is in the details.
> >>"Landscape level" conservation and
> >>"acre-by-acre" footprint of Walmart stores
> >>don't quite match up. Money is money and I'm
> >>certainly not saying that WM contributions are
> >>not potentially valuable, but I can see the ads
> >>now: slow camera pan over a
> >>forest/desert/canyon/lake/etc. Voice over: For
> >>every acre of Walmart stores built, we save an
> >>acre of America's natural heritage for you.
> >>
> >>Reality: Using a local example discussed on
> >>Vision 2020 recently, the cedar grove on Moscow
> >>Mountain, estimated value including stumpage is
> >>somewhere in the 1.3 million dollar range for
> >>just under 300 acres. Call it $4000/acre. By
> >>the requirements of the grant program, WM pays
> >>half or $2k/acre for $600k total. For the
> >>purposes of this argument, let's assume that
> >>$2k/acre is a good average for the "high
> >>conservation value" lands that are the focus of
> >>the program and it's $3.1 million annual
> >>budget. That would be 1,550 acres nationwide.
> >>Walmart plans on building 1500 stores this
> >>coming year according to news reports. Average
> >>footprint of stores and parking lots is @30
> >>acres or 45,000 acres of Walmart stores this
> >>year alone or a deficit of 43,450 acres
> >>unfunded in their program.
> >>
> >>If WM is serious about offsetting their
> >>landscape level impacts, they'll need to kick
> >>in another $86,900,000.
> >>
> >>Mark Solomon
> >>
> >>At 8:58 AM -0900 2/27/06, Chris Storhok wrote:
> >>>Just in case Moscow loses its battle to Super Wal-Mart:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>National Fish and Wildlife Foundation and Wal-Mart
> >>> Invites Proposals for Acres for America Program
> >>>
> >>> Deadline: April 1, 2006 (Pre-proposals)
> >>>
> >>> A partnership between Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
> >>> (
> >>><http://www.wal-mart.com/>http://www.wal-mart.com/
> >>>) and the National Fish and Wildlife
> >>>Foundation (
> >>><http://www.nfwf.org/>http://www.nfwf.org/ ),
> >>>the Acres for America program was established
> >>>to provide funding for projects that conserve
> >>>important habitat for fish, wildlife, and
> >>>plants through acquisition of interest in
> >>>real property. The goal of the Acres for
> >>>America program is to offset the footprint of
> >>>Wal-Mart's domestic facilities on at least an
> >>>acre-by-acre basis through these acquisitions.
> >>>
> >>> Through the program, approximately $3.1
> >>>million will be made available annually, for
> >>>ten years, for conservation investments.
> >>>
> >>> To be considered for funding through the
> >>>Wal-Mart partner- ship, acquisitions of
> >>>interest in real property should have the
> >>>endorsement of appropriate federal, state, and
> >>>local government agencies as an acquisition
> >>>with high conservation value; endorsements by
> >>>nonprofit conservation organizations are also
> >>>a primary consideration. Acquisi- tions that
> >>>contribute to "landscape level" conservation
> >>>efforts that help reduce fragmentation are
> >>>preferred over isolated acquisitions. In
> >>>addition, important fish, wild- life, and/or
> >>>plant resources such as endangered species or
> >>>areas of significant biological diversity, as
> >>>identified by credible conservation agencies
> >>>or organizations, should be conserved through
> >>>the acquisition. The fee transfer or
> >>>perpetual easement must qualify for
> >>>"conservation purposes"
> >>> as defined by Internal Revenue Code Section
> >>>170(h). Access to the land by the public is
> >>>preferred but not required.
> >>>
> >>> All grant awards require a minimum 1:1 match
> >>>of cash or contributed goods and services.
> >>>Federal funds may be considered as match.
> >>>Higher ratios of matching funds will at times
> >>>aid in making applications more competitive.
> >>>
> >>> Visit the NFWF Web site for complete program
> >>>information and application procedures.
> >>>
> >>> RFP Link:
> >>>
> >>><http://fconline.fdncenter.org/pnd/10001072/nfwf>http://fconline.fdncente
>r.org/pnd/10001072/nfwf
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>Chris Storhok
> >>>North Pole, AK
> >
> >
> >>_____________________________________________________
> >> List services made available by First Step Internet,
> >> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> >> http://www.fsr.net
> >> mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> >>¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
> >
> >_________________________________________________________________
> >Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger!
> >Download today - it's FREE!
> >http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/
>
>_____________________________________________________
> List services made available by First Step Internet,
> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> http://www.fsr.net
> mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
>
>
>
>_____________________________________________________
> List services made available by First Step Internet,
> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> http://www.fsr.net
> mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
More information about the Vision2020
mailing list