Originally posted by FredT
Originally posted by tom goose
this at first seemed like a victory, but it is really just a snobby town that doesnt want to be labled poor,
Also, the city of Mountain View (also in the Bay Area) where a 3br 2 ba 1300 sq. home built in 1950 will run you 900K+ did allow a Walmart so
snobbery played little part in it IMHO
doesn't that seem weird though. what sounds like a town exclusive to those that have money, builds a big box store that the residence might not shop
at for trend reasons.
i dont know the area, is there a booming real estate economy?
they would not allow a big box wal-mart here in vancouver b.c that has seen similar if not higher property prices than you speak of. this town is
very trendy, it is very expensive, i think that is why more people keep coming here from all over the world, and that is the way city hall likes
it.
wal-marts in the areas are located in the poorer cities surrounding vancounver like New Westminister, and Surrey, which are the two poorest
neighboring cities.
a new skytrain is beeing built here for the olypics coming in 2010, and instead of runnin the line right down an existing unused track, that ran
through an upscale neighborhood, they are going to tie up traffic and destroy a beautifull boulevard running down a cheaper neighborhood. not because
they didn't want to offend the people that had a little more money, but because that is where they would get the most fairs.
The skytrain is the same as Walmart, they will usually be put where they will get the most use.
there is no mention of the publics responce to this in the article. is city hall speaking for the residence and what is a current trend they want to
see continue, or is this mearly a future projection of what things could be like. if it is the later then it is fair game, but if there is a current
fashion to the city image then wallmart has no right to step in, and sweet move with the Eminent Domain claim. i have no idea what it is but it
sounds like it russled some feathers.