Originally Posted by
Robert Foster
But doesn't a business have a reasonable option of putting in a parking lot if it attracts customers? A park by the way costs the city tax money it doesn't provide tax money. If the farmland is successful it isn't replaced by a walmart. If it isn't then the land has to be used for something. But more to the point that convience brings customers and that pays the bills and provides employment. If it didn't they wouldn't build it.
Putting in a parking for customers is a reasonable option, but to factor the parking lot size for the worst case shopping scenario, which may only happen on a few days during the business's early tenure, leads to paving over excessive amounts of land needlessly, and also encourages more shopping by personal vehicle leading to more traffic on our roadways, and many roadways are having trouble in keeping up with the demands already being placed on them.
One doesn't have to put in a park, it could be an option, but one doesn't always have to be stuck in the tax revenue generation mode on everything, as well as having to put the personal motor vehicle on the top tier of shopping center designs.
As for farmlands, not all farmland is taken off the registers due to their being unsuccessful, but that the price of the land becomes too valuable from developers waving big dollars at the owners, with many farmland owners succumbing to the temptation.
In some cases, the farmland owners are forced out by the surrounding developed land owners, either through legislation or public pressure.