Another Valencia Street Business Owner Speaks Out

by

The following is an open letter from Wayne Whelan, local business owner, to Pilar LaValley of the San Francisco Planning Department:

Dear Pilar,

It has come to my attention that American Apparel has expressed an interest in leasing a space on Valencia Street in the previous Valencia glass space. As the owner of Therapy  I have had 4 different locations on Valencia street.  Our first location opened on 05/29/94 at 545 Valencia St and has been open since then.  Other locations have come and gone, when we first opened we sold only used goods, and were lucky if we grossed 20,000.00 in sales for the entire month.  Our company now has 6 locations in various California communities, grossing millions in sales each year.  Therapy has had a long and fruitful relationship with American Apparel, selling their clothing in our many locations.  The owner of the proposed location also owns Muddy Waters and has been making my coffee practically daily for the last 15 years, I consider him a friend.  Valencia Street remains of the few SF neighborhoods with a distinctive urban vibe, and many independent retailers have created a retail environment that many corporations would give their teeth to exploit.

While I am unaware as to whether you have solicited public opinion in this matter, I felt compelled to tell you that I oppose the introduction of national chain stores of any type into the Valencia St corridor (at least that’s what the real estate agents call it).  Make an exception for American Apparel and the door will be open for others to follow, raising rents, lowering wages and benefits for workers and in general homogenizing a wonderful destination into a place that could be anywhere USA.

American Apparel has done some good things for folks making clothing in their factories in LA, (although I don’t much care for it’s controversial CEO insisting on photographing his employees in their underwear). The owner of this building is my friend, but the mission does not need corporate chain stores in order to be a viable destination.   Seven years ago at the height of the “dot com” Valencia St was touted by many as being the center of the universe — without a single corporate entity.  Please, let’s try and keep it that way.  Should you ever be in the neighborhood trying out one of the dozens of outstanding restaurants, all independent, I might add, stop by and say hi.

Thanks for your time.

wayne whelan

About these ads

4 Responses to “Another Valencia Street Business Owner Speaks Out”

  1. jim Says:

    I find these kinds of debates interesting, and it’ll be interesting to see how this story plays out, but gotta say, this email is the kind of NIMBYism that makes people sigh. Wayne Whelan says:
    1. [I have] had a long and fruitful relationship with American Apparel;
    2. American Apparel has done some good things;
    3. I oppose the introduction of [American Apparel] into the Valencia St corridor.

    This reminds me of Prop 8, in which businesses would say:
    1. We have nothing against gay people;
    2. We like it when they shop at our stores and give us money;
    3. We just don’t want them allowed to get married, therefore we contributed to Prop 8.

  2. RDA Says:

    Jim, that is some seriously twisted logic. Do you think that American Apparel, an international chain, is an oppressed minority like gay couples? Or do you think the city is desperately in need of more overpriced gold leggings, and the Mission district, in it’s selfishness, is causing the legging-deprived to suffer? Every neighborhood has a right to self-determination. A pressing *public* need, say for low-income housing, may override that right sometimes, but retail? No way!

  3. jim Says:

    RDA,

    I didn’t compare American Apparel to gay couples. I compared Wayne Whelan’s reasoning to the reasoning that I heard several businesses use to justify their financial support of Prop 8 (particularly in light of Prop 8 opponents using the publicly available donor list to boycott/picket said businesses). Do you not agree that the logic employed by both are similar?

  4. wayne Says:

    Jim,
    I apologize if my comments have confused you or others.
    [I have] had a long and fruitful relationship with American Apparel;
    My independent clothing store located on Valencia St sells american apparel so it’s not like I hate the company or anything like that. I don’t sell enough of it to matter if they open or not.
    2. American Apparel has done some good things;
    American Apparel’s stance on workplace rights and immigration is not the topic here.

    3. I oppose the introduction of [American Apparel] into the Valencia St corridor.
    I oppose their opening on different grounds- that they are a formula retailer, and that if the city allows one many will follow. This would in my opinion, cause an impact on the quality of life for the neighborhood. I included the details regarding my relationships in the interest of disclosure, not to create confusion. Hope this helps explain my logic…

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

%d bloggers like this: