The Chronicle, today, published an editorial on the issue. The editorial rightfully concludes that my city, the City of Hercules, is correct in asserting eminent domain to stop the developmental plans of Walmart along the city's waterfront, but does take the not-so-subtle opportunity to rip on the suburban village from across the bay in San Francisco. The paper, it seems, must serve its readers, the urbane urbanites of elitist San Francisco.
Image: SFGate.com
Headline: Hercules' Fight to be Cute
Tagline: Urbanites may sneer at the town's look, but its choice to fight Wal-Mart deserves applause
First some bad: John King, the editorial's author, writes, "Hercules' old-fashioned new neighborhoods are downright unreal. The houses are too pristine, the landscaping too prim. They're modeled along the lines of a bungalow-filled village of yore, yet the result looks like a pastel launching pad for commuters." (They are new homes; the city is 20 minutes north of Oakland, 40 minutes outside of SF; makes sense...)
And some good: "Planners aligned with the New Urbanism movement crafted new neighborhoods that had the feel of a pre-World War II suburb, with pedestrian-friendly streets as well as parks and shops and restored wetlands." (Oh yea.)
And some middle-ground: "Wal-Mart's enemies depict the 5,200-store chain as a massive feral pig that uproots and devours everything from small-town economies to the national health care system. But Hercules' status as a suburb puts off smug urbanites, and the nostalgic air of the new district would strike condescending outsiders as Martha Stewart-esque." (Never heard of this Stewart person...)
And the author's mixed conclusion, which lends creedence to the master-planned community and then takes it away: "Personally, I'm not sure what to think when I visit. The built quality is worlds above what you find in other new suburban areas, such as American Canyon to the north in Napa County. The streets are orderly and the weave of parks and walkways is enticing. But there's an air of make-believe. Strangest of all is Sycamore Street near the bay, where attractively retro structures have storefronts on the street, living quarters up above ... and not a person in sight. Next door is land reserved for a sort-of Main Street that would include small shops and a waterfront park. We'll see when it arrives."
Point is, it is nice in Hercules, very nice. Especially on the waterfront. Overall, the editorial "did good" in my view. I am just taking exception to a few of the not-so-nice comments about my neighborhood. Not that it is all untrue: the development is still underway (and with a long ways to go, but I see that as a good thing); a ferry terminal (to SF) is still more than a half-decade from reality; and the few stores that have moved in are few and far in-between (and are mostly realty companies, which tend to be useless for happy residents). However, I live here...
When my fiancee and I were looking for a home, sure, we would have loved to have been able (e.g., afford) to live in the City (and then poke fun at little ol' Hercules and its fight against Walmart), but then again, you know what, we probably wouldn't have. A home on the waterfront in a town willing to fight the big guy sounds pretty inviting to me. It sounds like home. It sounds like Hercules.
