Lansing Hardware going out of business

Lansing HardwareDavid Lansing letter
David Lansing released a statement this afternoon about Lansing Hardware going out of business, effective May 1. A going-out-of-business sale starts this Saturday and he hopes “that some part of the store will continue to be part of the businesss community.”

Posted to the Nfld News website yesterday at 5pm: Lansing Hardware lawsuit settled.

An attorney for New Division Development Corp. and its principals, Beth Closner and Randy Lutz, confirmed late Tuesday that a settlement to his clients’ 2006 lawsuit is in the works. An agreement could be finalized by month’s end, said Minneapolis attorney Tom Harlan.

55 thoughts on “Lansing Hardware going out of business”

  1. JG: Here’s another example: Lake Forest, IL. where Victor and I lived for 20 years. At one point while we were there (so before ’87) the council passed an ordinance saying no pylon signs would be allowed. There was no argument; not only were there no Golden arches on the almost unrecognizable Mc Donalds, but the oil companies (Shell, amoco, etc) all took their pylon signs down and had low signs planted with flowers all around them.

    The point being, if a company wants to be in a specific market, they will adjust almost anything to the requests of that regulating gov’t unit. But that gov’t unit has to make the request/demand to express their vision for their community. This is not business UNfriendly; this is saying if you think you are going to make money in our market, we would like to be partners, not victims.

  2. Sorry for the confusion, I seem to have upset the software. I’ll try again.

    Can someone summarize for me the benefits the city provides to a big box store such as Target?

    It would be great to find a way to provide the same benefits en masse to the businesses located in downtown. I know this would be a challenge to design, since it would involve the variety of building owners, business owners, and historic buildings. Also, one would have to locate downtown on a map – though this could be solved by identifying a core area that’s 100% downtown for 100% benefits, then a ring outside that for 75% benefits and another ring for 50% benefits – these areas would then need to be re-evaluated periodically, such as every two years.

    Such a plan could help rebalance the unfair advantage box stores have. Not entirely, since it wouldn’t account for cheaper products, transport, etc, but it would certainly be a start. The downtown stores shouldn’t miss out on benefits from the city just because they’re smaller.

    I also continue to believe that the city should re-work all the steps required to make a change to a building/sidewalk area so as to streamline this into a one-stop-shopping model. All the discussion and decisions should be made at one time, and be available at least once a month so owners can plan accordingly and know when the process will be complete.

  3. Ross & Kiffi- Thanks for the examples. That was a few years ago that I visited Sedona and was told that about the McDonalds. Perhaps Sedona was able to break into the corporate wall and other cities have benefited. Or, perhaps the the person was just a little sold on Sedona. Either way, I think it is always good to challenge something that doesn’t seem quite right. It was only one small stone that felled Goliath.

Leave a Reply