Wal-Mart Looking at Second Lakeview Location

So...we're going from a situation where there are no Wal-Marts in the city to one in which a guy living at Broadway and Belmont can flip a coin to decide whether he should walk north or south to visit Wal-Mart?  Why don't we see how the first one works before we add another so close?

This location doesn't make much sense. Within one block there is a Jewel, Walgreen's and Whole Foods. Treasure Island is 1/2 block past Jewel. 

Few things:

1) Businesses (especially at the corporate level) operate to make money.  The aren't in existence to help poor communities.  They don't (generally) put their stores where they don't think they can make money.  This is exactly why I support incentives to make them "do good", penalties to get them to obey the rules, etc.  Regulation and incentives are good, m'kay.  But my point is that expecting companies to open stores in "food deserts" is silly, as is expecting them to not open up stores in one of the most densely populated hoods in the country.  They've crunched the numbers and the numbers have told them it makes sense here but not on the West side.  Why that is (and why food deserts exist) and whether this is moral is kind of beside the point:  based on their analysis, they are going to go where the money is.

2)  That particular Jewel is absolutely *pegged* between 5 and 7pm any given night of the week.  Treasure Island is pricey and focuses more on specialty items than the standard goods of your usual mega mart.  Giving folks an option that isn't Jewel or TI will be appreciated and used by some segment of this neighborhood.

3) No matter how shitty the "Walmart grocery" (or whatever they are calling it), it will be a much, much better option for food shopping than any Walgreens I've ever been in.  Completely different category of store, IMO.

Not that I'm accusing you of making these arguments, but I've been in this argument so many times that it is getting tiring.  Generally speaking, folks against such developments (setting aside the "Walmart issue" of this particular proposal for a moment) tend to either be NIMBYs opposed to traffic, congestion and change in their neighborhood or folks that think not a single grocery should open in gentrified hoods until the food desert problem is solved (life isn't fair!!!).  I find both groups to be completely unrealistic and annoying.

In reference to your first point, I hear what you're saying and am sympathetic. The issue here, though, is that for years Wal-Mart consciously made the food desert the most significant part of its justification for coming into the city. That was a huge part of their argument. Thus, they will forever be linked in the minds of many to that promise, and will be justly made fun of whenever they abandon it.

Fair enough. Using it as an excuse then not following through is a crap move.

/offtopic I don't think they should have had to make the argument, though. If we are so intent on limiting big box stores, focusing on Walmart just seems pointless. Why aren't we setting up our local and state taxes to incentivize small merchants and make running big boxes more expensive? Rhetorical question, really... Anyway, I think folks are fighting the wrong battle.

When you find yourself walking between 3630 and 3640 Broadway, and you get the sudden, uncontrollable urge to purchase a bag of Cheetos, you may take comfort in knowing that Wal-Mart is there.

Often times I have found myself mere feet from the Walgreens and wished there was something closer where Gatorade and Snickers were available.

It's a really small food desert. It's kind of like a single food dune.