Today Fri Sat
It is forcast to be Fog at 11:00 PM EDT on May 24, 2012
Fog
29°/18°
It is forcast to be Chance of Rain at 11:00 PM EDT on May 25, 2012
Chance of Rain
31°/18°
It is forcast to be Overcast at 11:00 PM EDT on May 26, 2012
Overcast
26°/15°

54 Comments

news

The Junction Gets Its First Starbucks, Finally

20101126starbucks.jpg
The new Starbucks, at 3077 Dundas Street West, has been open for a week. Photo by Christopher Drost/Torontoist.


It’s basic physics: if a gritty neighbourhood grows cool enough and wealthy enough, Starbucks will result. Until last week, the Junction was the exception that proved the rule. Now, it just proves the rule.


The Junction’s first Starbucks opened last week in a renovated former hardware store at 3077 Dundas Street West. The storefront is in the middle of the neighbourhood’s main retail strip, consisting of new businesses providing things like raw food meals and performance weight training, but interspersed with holdovers from a dowdier generation of places like appliance stores and nail salons.
Over the course of the past year, residents have watched as 3077 Dundas Street West’s owners restored its formerly rickety exterior, cladding it with new brick and even adding a third storey with its own balcony. Rumours that a certain international coffee chain was interested in the building’s ground-floor retail space began circulating early last summer, but it wasn’t until the City granted Starbucks a sign permit in mid-August that it became abundantly clear that the deal was done.
Martin Lennox, chair of the Junction Residents Association, is taking the chain’s arrival in his neighbourhood of seven years with ambivalence. “I’m mixed,” he says. “I think there’s enough independent consumers in the area that independent shops will still be supported.”
The Residents Association considered taking action against Starbucks, but their executive board was divided over the issue. “We decided not to support [opposition to Starbucks] unless we got a vote of support at one of our members meetings,” says Lennox. Contrast this with the furor that broke out in Kensington Market two years ago over the mere suggestion of a Starbucks opening.
“The community seems pretty evenly split,” Lennox adds. “We’ve even done some online surveys and they’ve come out pretty even.”
“I think people just like Starbucks. It’s a big corporation for a reason.”
On the corner opposite to the new Starbucks is Crema Coffee, a locally owned café that opened in the Junction in 2008. On Tuesday afternoon its airy, moderately sized interior was nearly at capacity.
“We don’t foresee any drop in sales,” says Geoff Polci, owner of Crema. “We actually are projecting an increase in sales, simply because of the fact that the Starbucks is going to bring more people to the area.”
In conversation with coffee people, one gets the impression that this is conventional wisdom in the trade: a shop with a quality product and neighbourhood cred can thrive on competition with Starbucks.
“Long-term I think it’s a good thing for the neighbourhood,” continues Polci. “Am I crazy about having it right across the street? Maybe not so much.”
In addition to foot traffic, Starbucks has the ability to draw more investment to the Junction, but that would have a downside.
“This type of of development can be a type of base and springboard for other types of development,” says Lennox, the Junction Residents Association Chair. “That tends to drive up rent.”
But Starbucks is more than a barometer of neighbourhood prosperity; it’s also a place to get coffee. The Junction location is very nice inside and absolutely worth a visit, if only for curiosity’s sake. All the interior decoration seems to have been executed with the intention of making the space seem worn-in and aged. There are distressed bits of vintage molding nailed to the wall behind and above the counter; there are couches and chairs arranged around an intentionally rough-hewn coffee table in the back the shop, next to a faux-fireplace that emits real heat. The floors are made of slats of a woodgrained material that actually, on closer inspection, appears to be some sort of composite. On top of the fireplace mantle is a wooden sign that says: “THE JUNCTION.”
It’s like a 1:1 scale replica of an established hangout in a transitioning neighbourhood. And soon, in all likelihood, it’ll be the real thing.

Comments

  • http://undefined totallyspun

    It’s not a renovated retail store; they razed the original building to it’s foundation and built up what you see from scratch, keeping a hint of the celebrated original architecture in the curved front corner.
    Although the Starbucks rumours existed well before the development started, once the boards came off around the new building it seemed pretty likely that the retail floor was custom built just for them.

  • http://flickr.com/aged_accozzaglia accozzaglia

    So this is the fault of whose ho, then?

  • http://undefined Mike

    Well, one of the reasons I like Starbucks — even if indi cafes have much better coffee — is the fact that Starbucks isn’t part of the “war on the laptop” which most independent cafes in Toronto in recent years have engaged in.
    Independent cafes have disconnected their plugs, and some even ask you to leave if you don’t keep buying stuff every 45 minutes.
    OK! Starbucks it is.

  • http://stevekupferman.typepad.com Steve Kupferman

    I just got off the phone with Ambient Designs Ltd., who handled the building’s redesign, and they confirm that the job was a renovation and not a total tear-down.

  • http://undefined thelemur

    Crema Coffee apparently has free wi-fi too.

  • http://totallyspun.com totallyspun

    Crema does have wi-fi, and you don’t need to purchase a gift card and go through some ridiculous boldstreet login operation to use it like at Starbucks.
    I’ve never experienced this ‘laptop war’ as described by Mike. Sure Dark Horse has one hour connect limits through their (equally ridiculous) beanfield network, but you can reconnect as much as you want. But I am taking space from other would-be customers, so if I’m going to be a long time, I always buy a second drink, or consider leaving if gets really packed.

  • http://totallyspun.com totallyspun

    Having walked by an open pit in the ground every day during the development project says otherwise.

  • http://undefined mendel

    Here’s a “Before” picture. (Not making a claim either way.)

  • http://totallyspun.com totallyspun

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/falsepositives/4130987747/?rotated=1&cb=1259089532254
    This shot is of the foundation after the main and top floors were razed. I think Ambient Designs have a creative interpreation of the word ‘renovation.’

  • http://flickr.com/aged_accozzaglia accozzaglia

    This move away from free wifi (or any wifi) at independent coffee cafés can be traced back to 2005 or so on the west coast, where wifi’s popularity was well ahead of the curve, as was wardriving, finding open nodes that were deliberately left available to anyone in proximity who wanted to access it, and the “mobile office.”
    Call it a halcyon time, a by-gone age.
    In Seattle, places like Victrola Coffee were some of the first cafés to nix the wifi portal they hosted — initially on the weekends. Their business desicion rationale was straightforward: people would come in, buy a single beverage, and then park themselves at a table for up to eight hours, ignoring the peaks of daily business when tables became a scarcity. Ultimately, tables are real estate: buying beverages and snacks are a way of paying for the hospitality of staying in a spot.
    When I first went to Manic in 2007, for example, I was not surprised in the slightest — though mildly disappointed — that it was sans wifi, and I completely understood why. Manic is a tight space, and tables are often at a premium. If you’re a place like Starbucks where aggregate floor real estate comes in bulk, then you can afford to put down super-cozy sofas and allow free wifi. They know their locations generally have the capacity to absorb those who stick around a long time; those who stick around a long time are also more likely to come back for a second or even third beverage. They just didn’t figure this out until much later when they started with free-wifi.

  • http://piorkowski.ca/ qviri

    You’re confusing the wifis. Starbucks’s requires you to check one checkbox these days. No sign up, no purchase necessary.
    (Second Cup uses Boldstreet. Also, while at Dark Horse, connect to the building network instead – the name is socialinnovation or SIG or something similar.)

  • http://stevekupferman.typepad.com Steve Kupferman

    Yup, I just saw that foundation photo after doing a little bit of searching myself.
    I’m going to look into this in as much detail as I’m able to, and we’ll issue a correction if it turns out what I wrote was inaccurate.

  • http://flickr.com/aged_accozzaglia accozzaglia

    Not quite SIG. It would be CSI, the Centre for Social Innovation’s open node. The node is called ‘socialinnovation’, as you noted.

  • http://totallyspun.com totallyspun

    Perhaps I’m just demonstrating exactly how frequently I go to Starbucks, but last time I used it there was a boldstreet login, and gift card purchase necessary. The GC I have still has an authorization pin on the back and I vividly recall battles with the boldstreet/Bell password recovery that went on for what seemed like hours. Kudos to them if they’ve made the process simpler.
    I won’t go to Manic because of the lack of wi-fi. Their coffee is great, but even on a short visit I want to be able to check my email and Facebook and what-not while I’m sitting there. In that case, I probably would go to a SB instead, or I’d endure the much worse coffee at Coffee Culture down the block.

  • Dry Brain

    I’m not being judgemental, because I work and use my computer in cafes too, but do we all have to be connected to our email/Facebook/whatever at all times? Can’t we just go to a cafe to hang with friends or drink some coffee or read a book/paper/magazine? No wi-fi seems like a weird reason to boycott a place at all times. It just seems like a reason not to go there when you do need wi-fi. If you ALWAYS need wi-fi, maybe you’re a bit web-addicted.

  • CanadianSkeezix

    Whether it’s a tear-down or a renovation, they did a pretty nice job. Better than a lot of the cheaply-built infill that tends to pop up on this city’s main commercial thoroughfares. Is that actual stone or precast?

  • http://totallyspun.com totallyspun

    Well, no. If I were going just to hang out with friends that would be a different story. However, we’re specifically talking about using laptops in cafes, so if that’s what I was after it would definitely affect my choice of cafe vis-a-vis Manic Coffee.

  • http://undefined Mike

    Dark Horse also disconnected the power to all their outlets, and then eventually covered them.
    There was actually an article about Dark Horse doing this. The management proudly explained they were trying to promote “cafe culture”, and while they are not opposed to people on their laptops, they’d rather people socialize, etc. Like they do in Europe, or some crap like that.
    My point is that Starbucks has this crazy “Third Place” policy. I know this because my wife used to work at Starbucks. But you can try it yourself.
    Go into a Starbucks, pull out a book, and just sit there and read. Don’t buy anything. You’ll never get kicked out. This won’t be a matter of no oversight.
    In fact, it’s Starbucks policy not to kick anyone out of the store. They have no policy of customer-only seating. They are, as a matter of policy, “open to the public”. Unless people are causing an undue disturbance.
    So, it’s not Starbucks’ coffee that drives me to them. It’s their customer service.
    I’ll give you a true story: I walked into a place called Moonbeam Coffee. And sat down to wait for my friend to arrive. After I had been sitting for 30 seconds, a woman came over from behind the counter and said I would need to buy something. I said that I was just waiting for someone to arrive, and I’d been ordering when they arrived.
    My friend was running a bit late, and 5 minutes later, she came back over and demanded I immediately purchase something or immediately leave.
    I left. I sent a text message to my friend to meet me elsewhere. And I’ll never give them business again.

  • http://undefined Mike

    I have no problem with indy cafes that don’t cater to people like me that don’t work out of an office, but rather work as a roadwarrior in my job.
    My point, is it ticks me off when uppity neighbourhood associations and others want to chase Starbucks out fo the neighbourhoods to force people like me to be beholden to those independent cafes.
    Obviously, that didn’t happen in this case, but from the sounds of it, it nearly did, given that apparently about 50% of people wanted Starbucks blocked from entering the neighbourhood. Who are these authoritarian fascists who want to impose on property rights and deny choice to people like myself?

  • http://undefined detritus

    They pretty much took it down to the ground.
    It was har dot tell because of the hoarding, but it looked to me like maybe they kept the existing foundation/basement, and maybe part of the east wall (the one between this building and the next one over).
    That said, my understanding was that there were good structural reasons for what they did, and they’re certainly done a good job on the architecture and appearance of the rebuild.

  • http://undefined diaboni

    I could be mistaken, but I know that in some regions any work done on a house is considered a renovation if an features of the original structure are left intact whereas complete removal off all of the original elements means the developer has to apply for a building permit, which is much more expensive.

    So, I have seen houses where everything was removed except part of a chimney, so that it would qualify as a renovation and not a new build.

  • rek

    Moonbean in Kensington? The place with, what, 8 tables and seating for less than 30 people?

  • http://undefined Iani

    my understanding that they got condemned after they removed the second story as structurally unsound as per this photo http://www.flickr.com/photos/falsepositives/4075341943/ and have to take the whole thing down.

  • thelemur

    The irony of this debate between ‘café culture, ergo no wi-fi’ and ‘third place, wi-fi, no one has to leave’ is that for all its standardization and corporate aura, Starbucks sometimes comes closer (along with independents who do offer free wi-fi) to the real, traditional café culture.
    The idea of café culture and cafés as a centre of discussion and socializing is the idea of the café as a third place after home and work, based on the Viennese model in which patrons are provided with free newspapers and never prompted to leave or make additional purchases.
    Free wi-fi access is our era’s version of a selection of 19th-century Viennese newspapers. Cafés don’t have to offer it, but the appeal is understandable.
    I don’t think Starbucks should be opposed or blocked for its own sake and in fact the Junction sbould welcome the arrival of choice. As long as there is variety, there should be room for all kinds of coffee places.
    Incidentally, it seemed for a while as if a new Starbucks was coming to the rather barren Dupont/Christie area, but it belatedly ended up being a Catholic school uniform outlet, something with much less broad appeal.

  • http://undefined moles

    This headline should have read “The Junction gets its first Starbucks, sadly”, because the arrival of Starbucks is the beginning of the end of what was so great about this neighbourhood.
    Sorry to see so many comments in favour of this sad development. My but aren’t we all eager to sell out to the monoculture of corporate coffee in return for an hour’s free WIFI.

  • http://flickr.com/aged_accozzaglia accozzaglia

    Moles, that’s a very simplistic, reductionist, even naïve way to look at it.
    Tough as it is to swallow, at play here is at least two styles of conformity: one is based on a product brand consistency (“corporatization”), and the other is reliant on a social-economic code of conformance (“indie culture and locality”). Starbucks is hardly the greatest thing ever, but so much worse — both as an installation and as an anchor in the neighbourhood — could have been built in its place.
    It has monetary might, but no independent coffee café would have been able to pony up the capital to re-build a structure which fits the local architectural heritage (as this site case reveals). Moreover, should Starbucks leave that location, it will be easily convertible into other uses and perhaps so by independent businesses. As corporate hegemony goes, we’ve each seen so much worse. Even our national cousin to Starbucks, Second Cup, are not typically known for doing this.
    I postulate that Starbucks is rectifying its inherent evilness of its post-1992 IPO existence by adapting themselves to what people do and don’t want for their locality, rather than bending the locality to its whims as it once did to attract a specific demography (e.g., “hockey moms”, “office worker”, etc.). What people like from city to city is more universal than we let on to. As a once-resident of Seattle where Starbucks isn’t loved, but no longer as hated, the intense and matured café culture there forced Starbucks to curb its notorious tactic of wiping out localities with its decidedly McDonald’s-like approach of making the space of a location look like a Starbucks. People there retaliated, because they didn’t like seeing what we all hate seeing. Now, when they open a café, they adapt themselves to the quirks of the space they are going to use. This small detail matters, because it is an affirmation that local appeal is built as much on social interaction as it is on familiar architectures which have been in place before its arrival.
    I concur with lemur that Starbucks comes closer today to genuine café culture than most independent places locally which seem devoted to the notion of socially engineering the milieu, its clientèle, permitted durations, and the sanctioned activities of its patrons. I don’t appreciate being told how to interface with a coffee café as an implicit condition of purchasing their beverage (the Soup Nazi comes to coffee?). And for someone who isn’t from “the neighbourhood”, that too is probably alienating for them (and possibly informs the macro reason why there’s so much “anti-downtown” sentiment in our city right now). Speaking from my experiences elsewhere and seeing it happen there, when our indie cafés stop taking themselves so seriously here, you will be amazed by who will start to show up. Don’t think of that as threatening. Think of that as embracing in the diversity we espouse ourselves to be as Torontonians.
    For the record, I have never loved Starbucks. But their change of behaviour over the past few years have gone from my never going there to at least giving it consideration when looking for somewhere to sit, sip, and read (or, yes, intarweb) without pretensions or worry that I won’t socially fit in (and really, I don’t fit in anywhere, but I make up for it by adapting to wherever I go when need be).
    Incidentally, Bloor West has an international corporate chain which hasn’t received any such flak just yet: it’s called Aroma Espresso Bar. As they start to open more locations, I wonder when and if that will start to change.

  • http://undefined detritus

    I’m pretty sure that it was the property developer, rather than Starbucks, that put in the capital required to rebuild the building here.

  • http://undefined detritus

    So, where’s the correction?

  • http://undefined VR

    Postulate? Milieu? For someone talking about embracing diversity, you sure have limited the accessibility of your post by throwing in a lot of ten dollar words in order to artificially beef up a point that could easily be said quicker and simpler. The irony of you suggesting these cafes take themselves less seriously is pretty awesome.

  • http://undefined mark.

    I find it strange that so many people expect a cafe to provide free wifi without requiring you to either pay for it or buy something.

  • http://flickr.com/aged_accozzaglia accozzaglia

    Bite me.
    (How’s that for brevity?)
    Torontoist’s readership is not at the education level of Toronto Sun’s readership, unless of course you’re recommending it is. I won’t. “Postulate,” at least in the backwards, backwoods place I came from, was a grade eight word (in math!).
    And “milieu”? We live in Canada. Come on now.

  • http://flickr.com/aged_accozzaglia accozzaglia

    For Torontoist journalist writers, this might be worth finding out and reporting on it.

  • http://flickr.com/aged_accozzaglia accozzaglia

    This is partly because people regard the internet as a public good, and wifi nodes are in the same thought process regarded like a public commons (such as a bubbler, city park, public washroom, street, or whatnot) — even when the latter really isn’t. It might eventually, but we’re not there yet (if the Toronto Hydro public network downtown, ca. 2006, was any indication of this being harder than it looks — OneZone hardly being a benchmark model).

  • http://undefined VR

    Oh, I wasn’t suggesting the fine people here can’t understand you, I’m suggesting that you come off like an overly-wordy snob. And it’s funny to me, y’see, because you’re saying that indie cafes need to loosen up. Pots, kettles, all that.

  • http://flickr.com/aged_accozzaglia accozzaglia

    Oh, I’m dreadfully sorry.
    I didn’t know this discussion on cafés was going to get attacked (lambasted?) by someone who took issue with select words. I use synonyms most appropriate for a description, since one size fits all quite poorly.
    Which, incidentally, goes back to the heart of our coffee café discussion: Starbucks tossed out (eschewed?) the “make it all fit our look” tack for the “we will work within existing features to create distinct places” approach, just as several individual cafés around town place pressure on (impel?) their customers (patrons?) to play by their social-setting plan and fit in (conform?).
    Like thelemur said, this has become an interesting contradiction (paradox?) as Starbucks feels more like a “coffee lounge” in the old school (orthodox?) sense, while many of the local cafés trying to “get back” to that orthodoxy are labouring to exact a specific audience (clientèle?).
    That said, I now think that because you were the nitpicker over vocabulary selection, I’m really not the one of us who was behaving as word snob over this exchange. I swapped out the word I would have used (and stuck it in parentheses) with something simpler.
    I’m not sayin’, but I’m just sayin’.

  • http://undefined mark.

    Maybe, but I think there’s more to it. A cafe, Starbucks or not, isn’t really public – cafes are about as public as a mall. I’d suggest that it has more to do with the promise of Starbucks.
    Sure, there were probably non-Starbucks cafes offering wifi before Starbucks did, but I’d bet most people expect non-Starbucks cafes to provide what Starbucks does.
    Besides, if there were no Starbucks, we wouldn’t get analyses like this!

  • http://flickr.com/aged_accozzaglia accozzaglia

    First, I rooftop of a privately owned building is not a public space, even as some people swear it must be.
    The idea of “public” is lost upon many through no deliberate fault of their own: the “private-public” is all most have known for their entire lives. This makes having the debate on public space all the more challenging.

  • http://undefined mark.

    Interesting to define public space as “the commons” – space owned or open to all. I had often thought of public space as place with little to no rules, probably because many measure the ‘publicness’ of a space by what you can do there – they’ll say the mall or the The PATH isn’t a public space because you can’t hold a demonstration there. From the rule-based definition of public space, no place is public space. Referring to it as the commons is much better. And the rules of the commons are more of a social contract than an authority dictating rules. But, then again, the rules of the park behind my house are set by the local gov’t and it’s up for debate if their rules represent the commons… So, I guess we can say that public space advocates are, literally, communists! ha!
    Anyway, I just remembered there was a tea cafe near my apartment on Bloor that always had people sitting in there for hours (usually reading, not laptoping) and it is now out of business.

  • thelemur

    There are worse things that could have come to the Junction, and probably already have.
    What was ‘so great’ about this neighbourhood that its decline hadn’t already started with, say, a Domino’s or a cheque-cashing place? How exactly is Starbucks going to bring on ‘the end’?

  • http://flickr.com/aged_accozzaglia accozzaglia

    Scenester/pre-late-stage-gentrification/shabby-chic exclusivity — which for said exclusivists constitutes an “authenticity.”
    It’s a snarky statement, but without sounding all sweet and optimistic like Dick Florida, I can’t find any other useful way to describe it.

  • http://undefined moles

    Accozzaglia,you’re right: if you love luxuriating in an atmosphere of relentless marketing, prefer your barista in a corporate uniform, savour coffee sipped through a slit in a plastic lid, and enjoy music programmed by an industrial psychologist to maximize your consumer behaviour, then yes, there’s nothing wrong with Starbucks.

  • http://flickr.com/aged_accozzaglia accozzaglia

    Gosh, you’re absolutely right. You sorta sound like me from 1992 to about 2005: simplistically idealistic and craving a Utopia of independent coffee bliss, sparing little expense for reaching that nirvana, even if that meant I went weeks without coffee.

    if you love luxuriating in an atmosphere of relentless marketing, prefer your barista in a corporate uniform, savour coffee sipped through a slit in a plastic lid, and enjoy music programmed by an industrial psychologist to maximize your consumer behaviour, then yes, there’s nothing wrong with Starbucks

    But, you know, it is entirely possible — even probable — that one doesn’t luxuriate; doesn’t care if a barista is in corporate uniform (you must have had the luxury of never needing to work retail or service where a uniform or dress code was required, eh?); just drinks the coffee (or maybe something else) because it’s convenient and consistent; and ignores the psychologically engineered music sets played (including blocks of Broken Social Scene interspersed with Dream Warriors and Neil Young, for all we know) if she walks into a Starbucks to which she is not really loyal. But if it’s right there, and it’s open, then a sale will probably happen on basis of an assurance of consistency, for worse or better. She is able to go in, order what she wants, and not have to confront the unpredictability of an independent place whose quality, service, and social atmosphere are largely unknowns, if not possibly surly (witness Moonbeam by another commenter in this thread; for me, a number of places around Seattle come to mind from when I lived there).
    Or if you want to subtract the air of pretentiousness, throw Timmies on the list. Just as evil, eh? Not every place can be a Diabolos, Green Beanery, or Manic. For that matter, best of luck finding a place where a lid with a slit is not a to-go option under any condition.
    So unless you are endowed with the privilege of working your own gig where you set all the rules of tempo, tone, what you wear, and how you treat your clients, then you find that to earn a keep each week, something has to happen on your behalf: you either own the means of production or you work for it. That’s life in the practical sense. People work at a Starbucks or dance on a stage before lecherous men holding paper currency (see Zanzibar once again) to earn a keep and maintain a household.
    Not sure where you fall, but your Puritanical dash of anti-corporate idealism probably doesn’t reflect your daily reality of paying the rent — unless someone (parents) or something (trust fund) pays for it on your behalf. If that’s the battle you want to fight to better this world, then best of luck, but there are more important adversaries to chip away at out there than Starbucks and better opportunities to make forward traction in making the world a better place. They’re just not as romantic as throwing something at a Starbucks window or spray painting, “Drake you ho this is all your fault.”

  • http://piorkowski.ca/ qviri

    Moonbeam can be a little… special.
    A lot of the indie-r cafes in general don’t have as much service consistency as you might expect.

  • http://undefined moles

    “Green Beanery”? You’re killing me here acco. Are you really that ill-informed?
    Try reading up on Lawrence Solomon, that “indie” shop’s owner, a self-described environmentalist who also just happens to be a climate change denier.

  • http://undefined Joey

    In the past, the coffee shops shall open stores along the road. After a large department stores were built. These shops will flock to open shop in it. Later, when the department began a struggle for crowded areas together. These stores will be opened along the road to reach the community closer.

  • http://flickr.com/aged_accozzaglia accozzaglia

    OK. I was spot-on the other day, but allowed for the benefit of doubt: you’re priggish.
    For sake of argument, Green Beanery, amongst others noted above, are establishments for which there is only one location. That was the point of name-dropping those three places. I don’t really investigate the practices of their owners or make judgement calls about them unless they acted untoward directly to me.
    Get off your high horse. Stay off your high horse. Show some moralistic humility.
    Have a better one.

  • thelemur

    Relentless marketing? Yeah, they sell stuff other than coffee. Last time I checked, quite a few indie places did that too.
    The barista’s attire is irrelevant.
    Starbucks will give you a ceramic mug if you ask for one to stay. Or you can bring your own mug.
    The music is usually just the music on the CDs they sell, which are sometimes compiled for Starbucks and designed to – shock! horror! – appeal to customers. It’s on the wrong side of hip compared to that new espresso place that has playlists ‘curated’ by some or other blogger, but essentially no different. It’s all promo.
    What’s wrong with Starbucks is essentially the coffee.

  • thelemur

    Aroma has received some low-level criticism mainly for being from Israel. Their coffee is insanely hot, but you do get a free chocolate with it and they have good food (which is apparently the reason they have done well in Israel while Starbucks has not).

  • http://flickr.com/aged_accozzaglia accozzaglia

    I was aware that there are three dominant coffee chains based in Israel. Those three competing against one another for such a small population base would probably make it hard for any outside company to get a firm foothold. Even for a place like Starbucks.
    I haven’t heard much flak about Aroma in Toronto being the target of anything negative. Maybe there is, but I haven’t seen it yet. Like you mentioned, I sometimes go there if I want a chocolate to have with my coffee.

  • http://undefined thelemur

    There have been a few very small-scale protests, but nothing that has really made the news.
    My understanding is that Starbucks really misjudged (or disregarded) the existing coffee culture that Israelis value, but you’re right that it is a tough market to get into in any case.

  • http://undefined AR

    This is the Junction’s second Starbucks, the first was on St. Clair, west of Keele. That was closer to the edge of the Junction, further from the Victorian strip on Dundas where this second Starbucks is located.
    The building itself was a teardown, though inspired by the building that stood there before it, which was quite bland but it had that attractive rounded corner and cornice.
    I think it’ll be much nicer than the new Duke’s building, which from the rendering looks about as cheap as you can get, which some extremely generic precast (poorly) made to look like stucco/stone instead of just using some classic Queen West red brick. It wouldn’t have been that difficult to rebuild the Victorian facade, either.

  • http://undefined cheribobbins

    I went to the Starbucks on Yonge just north of Davenport a few Sundays ago with a friend… Practically every table had a laptop on it and no empty seats – everyone looked like they were there to stay. It was a bit disheartening and made me wish that those that want to sit around being anti social would just go to the public library…

  • thelemur

    I had a similar experience at a Second Cup the other day. Every two-seat table was occupied by one person and his/her laptop. The coffeehouse equivalent of single-occupant vehicle traffic.

  • Fuvck

    now that’s a real shame. i lived in the junction back in the early 2004 when the neighborhood was in a much rawer un-gentrified state. back in those days the junction had a wonderful weird creepy NYC feel to it that was very much an unpretentious heaven from the rest of the city. sucks to hear starbucks has whored itself in there… guess another great neighborhood has bitten the dust. so glad i moved away from the junction and toronto, period