It is interesting to see how a campaign plays out.
No doubt by now, you have probably heard all about the
comments Laura Maczka made at a Tea Party meeting. Laura stated that we are now
an inner city and reinforced that statement with saying “We are no longer the suburb
to the north.”
She went on and then said “The demographics are going to demand that we make the changes. I think one of the biggest areas we are going to see the change is definitely going to be in housing. You know that word multi-family is something that is hard to swallow. And so I think more and more as we have lower economics folks moving in we are going to be able to have more affordable housing”.
Her supporters are claiming she didn’t really mean what she
said. Interesting things seem to have developed from that. One of those
supporters seems to now be at odds with what he wants Richardson to be. He
wants Richardson to be urban big time, with stack ‘em and pack ‘em ruling the
town. But in defense of his chosen candidate, he is saying she really doesn’t
want more apartments, which is in fact what he wants, high density. He is using
her campaign literature to show Laura really didn’t mean what she actually
said. His endorsement seems to conflict with what he claims he wants.
So it can be confusing what people really mean.
It seems Amir Omar is really pretty good about saying what
he means and does not find himself in the same position of having to retract
his statement like Laura has been. It seems he is better at picking his words
and picking the right words that leave little to be questioned.
Someone from one part of Laura’s inner city” sent me a
picture of Amir’s latest door hanger. Apparently they could be found in the
Canyon Creek and Prairie Creek area of the “inner city” Richardson.
With the Walmart question, it seems like once again, Amir is leading and Laura will
probably catch on and once again, led from behind on this issue.
Maybe I am wrong, but a leader really steps out and leads
from the front. A non-leader waits for a consensus before leading a charge.
My understanding is Walmart has made contact with one or two homeowner associations "testing the water" for a Walmart at the northwest corner of Campbell and 75.
ReplyDeleteIt has been said that Walmart had made no "formal approach" to the City regarding a store at that location.
The Walmart store to be built on the property at the northwest corner of Arapaho and Coit will replace the store to the south in the Promenade. What is notable is that Richardson loses the sales tax revenue(the new store will be in Dallas).
The signs you may have seen protesting the Dallas location will have no effect, as the 80,000 sq. foot store can be located there without having approval of the Dallas City Council. Anything smaller than 100,000 square feet needs no approval if zoned for business. The same holds true for the Richardson location.
Walmart would have to satisfy parking restrictions for the Campbell store.
Best guess is City will nod and acknowledge neighborhood concerns but approve to recover sales tax will be lost when Walmart leaves Promenade.
Since it will be a grocery store, it's likely even complaints from the Golden neighborhoods to the north and west of the proposed location will fall on deaf ears - there's money involved you know. If Laura is still with us, she and her band of ever cooperating colleagues will once again listen to to superior wisdom and knowledge of staff, (Of course, Mr. Dunn will be first to defer, then probably Mr. Solomon will blare out his agreements next, no doubt taking substantial time and Mr. Townsend will agree as well. Mr Mitchell once again will straddle both sides of the issue (which may be dangerous if he plans more family additions). Mr. Hartley may even say something, for a change - he is a Golden Meighborhood resident.
Will be interesting to watch. Will tax revenue win , or will the Golden Neighborhoods "no Walmart in my backyard" prevail?
The only thing more ridiculous than Amir's latest weird mailer about apartments would be if Laura's campaign does not publish Amir's voting record on apartments in the last two years. I can think of two cases where he was practically brokering the deal at the hearing while she and several were working to stop apartments and self storage. Good grief this looks desperate.
ReplyDeleteMay 1, 2013 at 5:55 PM
ReplyDeleteWalmart traditionally goes in wanting some property tax incentive. Talk is cheap Walmart gets a property tax abatement.
Good God no. Walmart will be a blight on that area. There is a Walmart at Midpark... why do we need another one there?
ReplyDeleteThe most recent rezonning of vacant land to Apartments at 75/Collins occurred earlier this year. It was unanimously approved by Richardson City council. It looks like Omar has a short memory and he himself is "giving way to more apartments."
ReplyDeleteAndy Gross
ReplyDeleteThe Walmaat at Midpark is a full-blown Walmart over 100,000 square feet.
The proposed Walmart at Campbell and 75 will only be a grocery store. And, why would it be a blight? Unless .you reside in one of the Golden Neighborhoods.
I live in Owen's park. While I like the idea of a close grocery store, I won't be taking my business there if they put a store there.
ReplyDeleteI'd rather not have a large retailer of any type at that intersection.
Think you're right - Campbell already has more than enough traffic, to say nothing of the access road activity.
ReplyDeleteThere is little chance that Walmart will get any kind of variance. Supporting a Walmart at Campbell/75 is bad politics and there are too many well-connected neighbors and staffers that will line up to opposse it no matter what sales tax revenue is at stake. That said, if they do not end up needing a variance because they shrink the size to be inline with the parking capacity as is.....well get ready for Wally World. We should not forget that this was orginally a K-mart.
ReplyDelete