Article content continued

Opponents of the project cite these factors, along with increased traffic and overflow, in making their argument that the impact of big-box retail would be unduly excessive in this unique, historic area.

The OMB, for the most part, agreed.

After RioCan’s first grapple with the public, the committee of adjustment called the proposal excessive in scale and hasty in execution.

Councillor Mike Layton, representing ward 19, says he expects RioCan to appeal the OMB ruling. He suggested the tug-of-war between residents and developers over the issue is far from over.

“This was not a small development proposed for that intersection,” Mr. Layton said.

Kensington Market … is not an island

It’s not just the multi-level commercial facility above ground that presents a concern, he said, but also the impact that demolition may have, the presence of a busy retail parking lot next to a hospital, and the longer-term economic impact felt by smaller nearby businesses, especially those in Kensington Market itself. But, he said, a continued appeal process is an opportunity for further public consultation.

To the proposal’s advocates, however, concerns couched in David-vs.-Goliath language about big box retail near the Market is NIMBYism, ultimately.

“Kensington Market … is not an island,” Mark Nozkiewicz, the developer’s representative, told Gleaner Community Press after the first decision in May. “It is surrounded by mixed-use areas.” Addressing the concerns of some residents about what a Wal-Mart in their backyards could mean economically, Mr. Noskiewicz pointed to nearby development on College Street in saying that many of these concerns are unfounded.

“This isn’t the first three- or four- or five-storey building on Bathurst Street,” he said at the time. “There’s an existing four- and five-storey building at the corner of Bathurst and College.”

Mr. Noskiewicz could not be reached Wednesday for comment.

National Post