IBJNews

Bloomington panel won't support chain-store ban

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

A task force appointed by Bloomington's mayor has decided against supporting his push to ban new chain stores and restaurants from parts of the city's downtown, and will instead consider other steps to protect the character of the area.

Supporters of restrictions said they believed some limits can be placed on businesses around the courthouse square and streets near the Indiana University campus.

One businessman told the group Tuesday that the threat of chain stores to the city's character isn't that great. CFC Inc. President Jim Murphy says that his company couldn't attract chain-store tenants to its downtown property because of the city's design restrictions and a lack of foot traffic.

Those issues haven't deterred all chain stores and some downtown sites could be redeveloped for such businesses, said Tim Micuda, the city's planning director.

"They could be substantial, and they could be substantially impacting us," he said.

City Councilwoman Isabel Piedmont-Smith says she doesn't want to remove existing chain stores, but wants to ensure they don't dominate the community.

As IBJ reported in October, Bloomington Mayor Mark Kruzan came up with the idea of banning chains in an effort to preserve the college town's identity. 

"For Bloomington, uniqueness is our strength,” he said then.

Already, the first block of Kirkwood Avenue outside Indiana University’s Sample Gates hosts as many franchises as any strip center. Urban Outfitters, Dunkin Donuts, Noodles & Co. and Panda Express operate alongside Nick’s English Hut and other longtime local fixtures. Kruzan said he became concerned recently when plans emerged to redevelop two key sites.

One is the former Linnemeier building, 422 E. Kirkwood, which housed a dentist’s office and independently owned balloon shop. The building was demolished over the summer, and the site is slated to become luxury apartments with street-level retail. The other is the former Ladyman’s Cafe at Kirkwood and Washington Street, where a developer is planning condos with ground-floor retail.

Kruzan formed the task force to evaluate the implications of a possible chain ban.

Last month, the Greater Bloomington Chamber of Commerce said it opposed Kruzan’s proposal.

“We see no evidence of an imminent or future threat to the vitality of the downtown–nor a compelling argument of similar nature–that would justify restricting chain or formula businesses in the downtown,” chamber CEO Christy Gillenwater said in a prepared statement released Nov. 4.

The chamber said it surveyed more than 850 members. Approximately 170 surveys, or 20 percent, were returned. Among those businesses that responded, 70 percent opposed “any sort of ban on chains or formula businesses in downtown Bloomington,” the chamber stated.

City staffers intend to present the task force early next year with several proposals for restrictions, Micuda said.

"We don't expect (to reach) consensus, but our goal is to appeal to some of the different points of view we've heard," he said.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Bloomington
    Perhaps city officials should erect a statue of their favorite "comrade" in order to proudly display their socialist tendencies. Then they can hire "illegals" whom they so proudly support to harass developers of chain stores and restaurants. Lastly, they could employ IU football recruits to join in the "illegals" activity. They sure don't know how to play football, so the Big 10/12 won't miss them. Neither will the rest of us.

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. These higher rates Co. e about only because physicians are now hospital employees. otherwise physicians couldn't charge these rates and share the windfall with the hospital. Community/rural hospitals probably not buying physicians practices and thus weren't getting the windfall anyway.

  2. The incentive for poor people to get themselves off public assistance and "no longer be poor" is even with help...they're STILL POOR! Being poor, even with some assistance, isn't all that pleasant. (I speak from experience) It's a stubborn myth that poor people, who are on public assistance, are sitting in the lap of luxury. You should try living on just those "freebies" that you mentioned and see how meager they actually are. By the way, I didn't mean you had to buy/own a puppy...just pet one. :)

  3. As near as I can tell the minority has ZERO constitutional obligation to offer a quorum to the majority. A requirement for quorum was inserted into the constitution so that tyrannical majorities could not simply shove through odious and objectionable legislation (which is exactly what they did.) By allowing a tyrannical majority to charge fines against the minority for exercising their constitutional prerogative to deny quorum the court as made a mockery of constitutional governance in the state of Indiana.

  4. The voters elected the Reps to make a vote not walk out on the vote. They had to the right to exercise their opinion and vote "no" to the bill. Let me ask you this if you walked out of your job for 5 straight weeks would you get paid? Would you even have a job to go back to? If any elected official walks out on the people they should be arrested for stealing tax dollars from the public. They were elected to do a job and not leave when the job gets stuff.

  5. I have been to several of their locations in Pennsylvania and always go in for 1 item and leave with a basket full of things. I'm very happy they decided on Indiana, now if only they would put the other store in eastside.

ADVERTISEMENT