Wal Of Noise

Less driving? So he figures only locals will be shopping there — walking to and fro — and nobody from East York or downtown or Scarborough will be driving in? Wasn't one of the first arguments that the big boxes would bring tens of thousands of parking spaces to an area that has very little?

Rek: The proposal currently working its way through the OMB calls for nearly 2,000 parking spaces (not tens of thousands). Still, doesn't sound much like a pedestrian dream, eh?

But I agree that the city needs to enforce better environmental standards with respect to these (and any) stores. Unfortunately that won't stop them from selling cheap, unnecessary consumer goods that themselves are bad for the environment.

Walkable? This project isn't even walkable within its own boundaries. The parking lot alone is meant to accommodate 1,900 vehicles. Insane.

What about the fact that about 1.2km north of the "Foundry District" site exists a newly renovated and brightened shopping complex called Gerrard Square anchored by Zellers, Business Depot, Home Depot, Winners and a Fresh Mart. It seems that the neighbourhood is already well supplied.

Also, it seems forgotten that not only is the livelihood of Leslieville businesses at risk if this project goes through, but the commercial strips along Queen Street East in The Beach and Kingston Road are as well.

It's unfair to minimize Cole's argument by describing it as "Walmart=conforming fascists."

This is Cole's "best" argument:

"Fact is, foes of Wal-Mart love a bargain as much as the next person. We're just not prepared to send profits stateside or to sacrifice workers' rights in pursuit of the almighty dollar."

And I happen to believe that's a fair and intelligent one at that.

I just found some time to read it and Preville's article is garbage. He's saying big box developments need to be designed better/more intense/more walkable but then goes on to opine that the Eastern Ave proposal is better than nothing so the city should settle for it. He glossed over a lot of aspects of the city's opposition and neglected to state that "employment uses" is a defined term in planning documents and refers to industrial/office type employment and not retail. To say that "the city wants employment and that's what being offered" is very simplistic and is the exact line SmartCentres is using at the OMB.

Reading about the feared demise of neighborhood stores made me think about a line in the article, "Though we don’t like to admit it, the majority of us are big-box shoppers."

Those people arguing for these stores, assuming they are not all store-owners fearing for their own livelihood, must know the truth -- that given the choice of buying the same products cheaper they will take it, if they haven't already.

Are those fighting this in principle the same as the people who fought to save the Eglinton Theatre, long after they had stopped choosing it when they actually wanted to see movies, or those people who lamented the demise of CN passenger trains, when they hadn't taken one in decades?

It seems far more helpful to be constructive with criticism -- if there is too much parking, where is it? At grade? Out front? Underground?

Will the stores have street frontage? Will pedestrians have to walk through cars to get to them?

The devil is in the details.

The parking is proposed to be at-grade (possibly several levels of a parking structure, I'm not certain). The stores are also proposed to have frontage along Eastern Avenue instead of inward facing storefronts and blank walls along the street.

However, the last I recall, the OMB is only considering official plan and zoning issues. There is no site plan under consideration and the proposed amendments are apparently pretty broad. If they are approve by the OMB there's no certainty as to what the development will look like and how it will relate to the surrounding neighbourhood.

Re: What about the fact that about 1.2km north of the "Foundry District" site exists a newly renovated and brightened shopping complex called Gerrard Square anchored by Zellers, Business Depot, Home Depot, Winners and a Fresh Mart. It seems that the neighbourhood is already well supplied.

I read uwajedi's comment to be enquiring why the area needs more big boxes when Gerrard Square already has a bunch. (There is also a No Frills-anchored strip mall a block west at Carlaw.)

> Walkable? This project isn't even walkable within its own boundaries. The parking lot alone is meant to accommodate 1,900 vehicles. Insane.

I can walk there in under 10 min.

>Also, it seems forgotten that not only is the livelihood of Leslieville businesses at risk if this project goes through, but the commercial strips along Queen Street East in The Beach and Kingston Road are as well.

Riightt... Cause you know, Walmart is run by hipster douche bags and they sell antiques :P

>Less driving? So he figures only locals will be shopping there — walking to and fro — and nobody from East York or downtown or Scarborough will be driving in?

The 'small box' stores attract about a dozen or so hummers and v12 benz's each day, on my strip of Queen East alone (I won't even touch up by Logan/Carlaw). On the weekend, you can't even walk a km w/o seeing one of these fine 'north york' cars.

Attracted by what? No, not Canadian Tire, no, not Zellers, but by the 'small box' stores selling specialty items for inflated prices that the area residence can't afford anyways.

Queen East small box stores are a joke and are only furthering the already swift gentrification of the area.

I've only been in a Wal-Mart once in my life, and it was a few months ago at a Wal-Mart Superstore in Scarborough. I wasn't protesting, necessarily; it's just that there aren't any Wal-Marts anywhere near me, even though I'm horrified at much of what Wal-Mart is and how they conduct business.

So—I walk into this enormous Superstore and I am utterly gobsmacked and horrified at the sheer enormity and soullessness. About five minutes in, I could totally see why people shop there and I was looking for more stuff to buy that I didn't know I wanted yet.

Because I live downtown and I mostly walk everywhere, I have no real use for Wal-Mart, but when you've got suburban car communities, human nature dictates that if you build Borg-Mart, people will come. It's just way too convenient and tough to resist, as ugly and soul-sucking as it is.

Controlling rampant development is crucial, but I think what we also need to focus on is making developers conform better to improving neighbourhoods and scaling their stores to be neighbourhood appropriate, like the Brick does with their subtle store in College Park, for example. If a box store is going into a neighbourhood like Leslieville, perhaps the corporation should build a smaller store but encourage practices like ordering and delivery. Even some shuttle buses instead of such enormous parking lots?

And especially—and this goes for condo developers too—force any developer to improve the surrounding streetscape and amenities as a condition to build, following an official and well-thought-out plan. Perhaps new benches, streetlights, public washrooms, trees, playground equipment...and build smaller. It's not like people won't come if one particular store has fewer garden gnomes or one less row of sport socks.

But the City rarely demands anything significant in fear of scaring the developer away, or because the developer waved a token amount of cash in front of their faces to grease some wheels. It's the exception that any neighbourhood improvements happen; not the norm—and I don't consider a new turning lane to accommodate extra traffic to a Wal-Mart a neighbourhood improvement.

When my condo was built, one of the requirements to build on the site was that the developer had to purchase and install a significant public art piece on-site. They did, but the developer rolled the cost of it down to the condo purchasers as a mandatory "art levy," and didn't have to pay a cent. And then part of the art wasn't even installed to leave room for idling cars and reserve enough space for the garbage truck.

Rek,

Reading and quoting things WITHIN context will probably leave you less perplexed in the future.

Context:

1st argument, it will attract cars.

Response: The small stores unrelated/out-of-reach to the people living in the neighbourhood already attract major traffic, usually cars with engines larger then a v8.

>So adding more Hummers and V12 Benzs parking spaces to the area will somehow solve that problem?

Yes, cause Leslieville is known for it's hummers and v12 benz's, idiot.

Context:

1st argument, "Also, it seems forgotten that not only is the livelihood of Leslieville businesses at risk if this project goes through, but the commercial strips along Queen Street East in The Beach and Kingston Road are as well."

Response, "Attracted by what? No, not Canadian Tire, no, not Zellers, but by the 'small box' stores selling specialty items for inflated prices that the area residence can't afford anyways."

Does it all make more sense now? Hey Troll?

>Gentrification doesn't only come from tiny stores, you know, so again: This is supposed to solve that problem? Walmart-shoppers don't buy antiques and designer coffee?

Not for the most part...

And turning that phrase on you, Do you honestly believe that large portions of Leslieville residents by antiques and specialty items? Keeping in mind that Leslieville isn't bordered by Joy Bistro to Carlaw Ave?

Providing a Wal-Mart in the area is simply catering to the working class and poor. It's obvious you have a problem with that...

I also have a sneaking suspicion that you live in/and around 290 Carlaw Avenue, probably in an over-inflated priced 'studio'?

Hip to the ster to the douche to the bag.

We moved out the moment starbucks and the rest of you moved in, seriously the whole neighbourhood went to crap after that.

The central issue for the City is the quality of the jobs being introduced to the area. The City has designated the site for higher paying industrial or office-type jobs, not retail.

The City isn't taking a stance on WalMart itself (last I heard they were not yet confirmed as a tenant), nor are they focussing on the design, though I'm sure that the design will be an issue if SmartCentres is given permission to build it.

"Yes, cause Leslieville is known for it's hummers and v12 benz's, idiot."

I wasn't the one who mentioned them first, you were, and you identified them (and just now with "major traffic ... engines larger than a V8") as a problem. If this "major traffic" is a problem, how will giving drivers more reason to drive in and park solve anything?

"Does it all make more sense now? Hey Troll?"

What does it matter if they're coming for Regal Hardware, Reliable Fish, or Walmart?

"And turning that phrase on you, Do you honestly believe that large portions of Leslieville residents by antiques and specialty items?"

Does a large portion of any neighbourhood? Parkdale has plenty of antique furniture stores too, I'm sure you're aware.

"Providing a Wal-Mart in the area is simply catering to the working class and poor. It's obvious you have a problem with that..."

And you obviously have a problem with catering to antique collectors and people who can afford lunch at Kubo Radio, for some reason. Why shouldn't they be allowed to set up shop too?

And, again, as pointed out several times already, the area isn't devoid of big boxes that cater to the working class and poor. So why the Walmart fetish?

"I also have a sneaking suspicion that you live in/and around 290 Carlaw Avenue, probably in an over-inflated priced 'studio'?"

Your instincts have failed you. Until recently I worked in the area, and I've seen it change for the better over the last 4 years. There was a time when women from my studio (an actual studio, where work is done) wouldn't go out to their cars/catch the street car unescorted after dark because they didn't feel it was safe in the neighbourhood. Since you care, I live at Bloor and Ossington.

"Hip to the ster to the douche to the bag."

If you can't hold up your side of the conversation without resorting to name calling don't expect anyone to be convinced by your claims. Alternatively, try fucking off, you sack of self-righteous shit. Because I'm tired of your poor-chic ironic hipster bullshit. Your choice.

I'm just not sure why you think it's OK to be against one type of development and not another. That's what you seem unwilling to address. Why is Walmart OK but Booze/Prohibition not? Why is it bad that Dark Horse and Mercury brings a couple Hummers down every day, but OK that Walmart will bring two thousand Chevy Ventures? Walmart would hardly be the first affordable big box in the area.

Do you think certain neighbourhoods should be designated for the poor only and all change within their borders managed to maintain the status quo? That the middle class should be banned from moving about freely? I'm honestly not sure what you think the solution to gentrification is, or if you're just content to complain about it.

(Starting a flame war? That's what you were doing in your last post.)

As a life-long resident of this "world-class" city, I really wonder where some of you are coming from? Do you all come from some small wintery hicktown like Winnipeg or Guelph? Gentrification is going to happen, as will the opposite, as any large city is still inhabited. It's a fact of life.

Anyway, the point of the discussion, as far as I can see, is whether Wal-Mart is good or bad for the neighbourhood. The only example we have of its impact on a neighbourhood in the city is at Dufferin Mall, which has actually classed up since Wal-Mart opened.

Oh, and rek:

>So he figures only locals will be shopping there — walking to and fro — and nobody from East York or downtown or Scarborough will be driving in?

I think people in Scarborough, generally, would go to one of these stores:

SHEPPARD AVE & KENNEDY RD
HIGHWAY #401 & McCOWAN ROAD
MORNINGSIDE AVE & MILNER AVE
EGLINTON AVE & PHARMACY AVE

That seems to cover those four corners.

And why you'd think people who live in Leaside would shop at Wal-Mart is beyond me.

It's all about a balance...

It's great that restaurants like Leslie Jones are opening in Leslieville, they cater to a certain demographic in the neighbourhood but for this middle/upper class demographic, who has essentially 'taken over' the area to save a buck on property, to turn around and say NO BIG BOX, it's b/s and hypocritical.

As of today in Leslieville, I'd say the balance is weighed in favour of the new residents not the old. Walmart et al would help balance that out.

rek, how did I miss the point? You're stating that building a Wal-Mart in Lesliville will increase vehicular traffic from other parts of the city. The two you pointed out were Scarborough and Leaside. I pointed out the four Wal-Marts in Scarborough and how they are closer to those people.

Then I questioned if Leaside dwellers would even go to Wal-Mart.

I think it's you who missed the point. Sorry I wasn't clear enough, although I figured I went above-and-beyond what was needed to prove the point (which is that a Wal-Mart in Leslieville will not increase vehicular traffic from those areas).

canuck1975 - You're still missing the point if you think Leaside and Scarborough (or any location in particular) were the important part of the original question.

torontothegreat - If you can drop your one man flame war I'll start replying again.

canuck1975 - Scroll up and you'll see I worked in Leslieville (until a few weeks ago) for 4 years.

You really believe only Leslievillians will be shopping at Walmart-in-Leslieville? That was the point, which I made in the very first comment post here: Walmart will choke the streets with minivans (REGARDLESS of where they're coming from, be it Pape and O'Connor, Danforth and Greenwood, Booth and Colgate, or Queen and Bathurst). Don't complain about the "horrendous" and "major traffic" that a handful of gentrifying shops bring, and then give Walmart a pass when they expressly plan to attract 2000 vehicles at a time.

They won't be teleporting into those parking spaces, you know.

Rek, I don't think you can see the logical fallacies in your thinking.

If x number of cars already exist in leslieville and those same x number of cars travel to another location to go to WalMart or (shudder) to 100 other stores to buy what they could/would buy at walmart then x number of cars have to travel much longer distances to get there.

If the same x number of cars can drive locally, they are driving shorter distances to do what they already do in the first place and therefore the traffic is 'localized' and more importantly minimized.

So x number of cars travelling a 1/4 of the distance (at least) to get to the same place they would go normally is a huge improvement to keeping that traffic localized and people driving less.

On the other hand. The small box stores, for the most part, attract a different clientelle from outside of the area. These people roll in each day, travelling long distances to be there. They shop at stores that have no roots in the neighbourhood (unlike walmart which will actually employ people) they then leave the neighbourhood, antiques and espresso's in hand and have merely contributed an annoyance to traffic and residents of the area.

The other misaligned logic you seem to be following is the fact that you're not breaking things down to reality.

If WalMart is 50,000 square feet and has products for every reach of your home/lifestyle then the area that WalMart occupies is the equivalent to 50 stores occupying 1000/sq ft. That sq/footage is wasted space along Queen street for something that can be contained to one area. The amount of area that 50 stores occupies along Queen street is geographically (by my own estimate) from Broadview to Pape (at LEAST). Keeping in mind the types of stores we're talking about here.

The other thing you're missing are the simple logistical problems that have to be solved in having those 50 independent stores vs. 1 store.

If each store has it's own supplier and own logistical solution then the amount of energy and consumption just to GET those products to market is astounding compared to WalMart which would have one logistical solution for a wide array of products at one location.

Your also looking at Leslieville from a looking glass (you worked there for 4 years, you didn't live there). The fact that you said, woman wouldn't leave the area w/o escort is laughable. I've lived in the area for almost a decade. I've lived and run businesses in the studios on Carlaw long before you worked there and have never had a problem (neither did any woman I knew in the area or any of my g/f's). I'm sure people think the same thing when they travel to Trinity Bellwoods Park at 12PM, but if you were to ask a resident of the area, they would laugh at you. People's "perceptions" don't define an area and Leslieville isn't known for rape or murder any more then the area occupying Trinity Bellwoods Park, so the "perception" of your co-worker(s) was wrong in the first place and now you're placing judgement on the area based on that same ignorance and paranoia. Not all poor people will rob you. It's unfortunate that you and your co-workers believed different and it's unfortunate that you believe you are safer around people in Ben Sherman who drive Vespa's vs people who work in Rock Quarries and wear lumberjack jackets -- that is how you're coming across.

"The City has designated the site for higher paying industrial or office-type jobs, not retail."

I wonder if the City could use this magic to designate me a freaking latte already.

Walmart would actually serve the current demographic of the neighbourhood (immigrants, lower middle-class etc).

What's there now, which is nothing, serves no one.

What's happening to Leslieville (the yuppification) will turn it into the new W.Queen West or Liberty Village.

I'll take Wal-Mart in Leslieville over the gentrification any day.

I just moved there. The proposed Smart Centre would be within a stone's throw. I have yet to really stroll around and discover the neighbourhood, but there's a really intimidatingly huge Loblaw's and a Price Chopper I didn't even go into, a Canadian Tire...there's lots of shopping opportunities. I'm looking at my budget and I am going to have to make some changes, given my higher rent and expenses. I will have to shop a little more frugally, and although I really wanna just go nuts with all the little stores and shops on Queen I will have to make my decisions with a little more care.

Oh, and I moved there from Parkdale because it was the best place offered to me and my roommate. Some of the places we saw in the west end, our preference, were absolute awful dumps. Most landlords never got back to us. It wasn't really our choice to move to the area. We're happy to live there, though.