Toronto Bathurst College Centre | ?m | 4s | RioCan | Turner Fleischer

[arvelomcquaig]

Why has this thread become a broken record of corporate lackeys proclaiming their approval of Walmart? I dearly hope this is just an inexplicably vocal minority.

This is a horrendous proposal and Walmart shouldn't be allowed anywhere. The invocation of pity for poor Walmart shoppers is not only disingenuous, but incredibly ironic, since Walmart exists as a result of and by creating poverty where their stores are located and where their products come from.

 

[picard102]

Why has this thread become a broken record of corporate lackeys proclaiming their approval of Walmart? I dearly hope this is just an inexplicably vocal minority.

Must feel nice to be better than everyone else who doesn't agree with your opinion.

 

[ChesterCopperpot]

Goodbye Walmart?

http://toronto.curbed.com/archives/2014/02/13/no-walmart-for-kensington.php

The owner of Good Egg in Kensington Market is reporting that Walmart is not coming to the market after all. It looks like Kensington Market wins this fight against Walmart and RioCan. More details to follow.

 

[picard102]

Say you won't have Walmart as a tenant, have them anyways. Success for all.

 

[Torontovibe]

They need to include some rental apartments here and make this more of an urban/high density development. Traditional, suburban style malls, should be a thing of the past. It's a bad way to use land. We need to rethink how we develop land to maximize its potential. I hate seeing all the wasted and badly used land in the burbs.

 

[ProjectEnd]

Exactly. The issue with this proposal from the start was that it did not include a greater mix of uses, not that it had Wal Mart as its lead tenant.

 

[atodaso]

Say you won't have Walmart as a tenant, have them anyways. Success for all.

What does this even mean?

 

[picard102]

What does this even mean?

It means they can say one thing, and do another. They aren't obligated.

 

[HDLtd]

Exactly. The issue with this proposal from the start was that it did not include a greater mix of uses, not that it had Wal Mart as its lead tenant.

And then the neighbourhood to the west complains about shadow impact and eyes in their backyards. Developers cant win!

 

[atodaso]

It means they can say one thing, and do another. They aren't obligated.

So, lie about your intentions and then bring in Walmart as the anchor tenant after the fact. And how exactly does that equate to success for all?

 

[atodaso]

And then the neighbourhood to the west complains about shadow impact and eyes in their backyards. Developers cant win!

Developers rule this town. They push and shove and almost always get their way. Your statement is absurd.

 

[Torontovibe]

And then the neighbourhood to the west complains about shadow impact and eyes in their backyards.

So let them complain. Everybody complains in this city but things still get built in spite of it. NIMBYs will never go away (or shut up) but we don't have to let them get in the way of smart, responsible development. If they don't want high density development, they shouldn't live in the downtown core. (or anywhere near it) They are free to move to Brampton.

 

[interchange42]

The blanket statements about developers, nimbys, and the get-out-of-TO-if-you-don't-like-what's-happening sentiments of the previous few posts surely rank amongst the most bottom-of-the-barrel, most useless posts on UrbanToronto in the past while. Isn't UrbanToronto supposed to be about more nuanced, better informed conversation, than just knee-jerk reaction?

42

 

[atodaso]

So let them complain. Everybody complains in this city but things still get built in spite of it. NIMBYs will never go away (or shut up) but we don't have to let them get in the way of smart, responsible development. If they don't want high density development, they shouldn't live in the downtown core. (or anywhere near it) They are free to move to Brampton.

The title NIMBY is absolutely counterproductive to any meaningful discourse about city planning. It's ambiguous and gets thrown around meaninglessly. It has come to mean anyone or any interest that stands in the way of, or has the desire to shape development. NIMBY's are cast as the villain - in spite of the fact that 'NIMBY's are the people that these developments are intended to serve in the first place.

 

[ksun]

They need to include some rental apartments here and make this more of an urban/high density development. Traditional, suburban style malls, should be a thing of the past. It's a bad way to use land. We need to rethink how we develop land to maximize its potential. I hate seeing all the wasted and badly used land in the burbs.

The entire Bathurst St is not urban, definitely among the worst one can do about a downtown street. It probably can pass as a street in Vaughan with hardly anything taller than 3 stories and worst of all, no retail at all.

http://goo.gl/maps/xbZqk

Is there anything to get the entire street redeveloped for higher density - midrise apartment with lots of shops? Bathurst is easily the most boring street downtown.