No Walmart for DC- What'll Become of the Real Estate Values in the Areas Close By Prospective Sites

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:People in DC will continue to shop elsewhere, further reducing DC's tax base and ability to provide basic municipal services. It's a vicious cycle. WalMart isn't some great benevolent entity, but they are someone willing to invest lots of $, employ lots of people (albeit not at first year associate wages), and provide needed taxes and development in poorer communities.

Laughably wrong.

What constrains DC's tax base is the lack of available housing for middle-class households. That means building more 3/4 bedroom condos with ground-floor retail, and encouraging mixed-use development on the boundary of gentrifying areas. Given a choice between having 100,000 new DC residents who will drive to MD or VA to buy durable goods, versus having stagnant population growth and big box stores with "ample parking" scattered around town, only a fool would choose the latter.

And the more sprawling suburban type developments we permit/encourage in DC, the less attractive DC will be for new residents who want to live in places like Capitol Hill, Columbia Heights, and Old Town. Big box stores make DC shittier; that reduces in-migration.

[Anonymous]

Walmart is not a plus in an already vibrant low price shopping corridor. Maybe high SES people will feel more comfortable shopping at Walmart, however, there are a number of "dollar' type stores in the area already selling low cost goods or cheap junk-your choice. Walmart got city concessions and did not offer any. Given how much we taxpayers will pay for Walmart, its employees' health care needs with little return, the bill will help protect DC's citizens in many ways.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Walmart is not a plus in an already vibrant low price shopping corridor. Maybe high SES people will feel more comfortable shopping at Walmart, however, there are a number of "dollar' type stores in the area already selling low cost goods or cheap junk-your choice. Walmart got city concessions and did not offer any. Given how much we taxpayers will pay for Walmart, its employees' health care needs with little return, the bill will help protect DC's citizens in many ways.

Exactly what concessions did Walmart receive? I was under the impression they were not given any tax incentives to come into the cit. Costco is s a different story however. The city paid or the roads and new sewers for Costco, but I don't recall the same legislation o Walmart.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People in DC will continue to shop elsewhere, further reducing DC's tax base and ability to provide basic municipal services. It's a vicious cycle. WalMart isn't some great benevolent entity, but they are someone willing to invest lots of $, employ lots of people (albeit not at first year associate wages), and provide needed taxes and development in poorer communities.

Laughably wrong.

What constrains DC's tax base is the lack of available housing for middle-class households. That means building more 3/4 bedroom condos with ground-floor retail, and encouraging mixed-use development on the boundary of gentrifying areas. Given a choice between having 100,000 new DC residents who will drive to MD or VA to buy durable goods, versus having stagnant population growth and big box stores with "ample parking" scattered around town, only a fool would choose the latter.

And the more sprawling suburban type developments we permit/encourage in DC, the less attractive DC will be for new residents who want to live in places like Capitol Hill, Columbia Heights, and Old Town. Big box stores make DC shittier; that reduces in-migration.

It's not the lack of housing. The middle class isn't moving to DC b/c the public schools suck so even if they can find the affordable house, they'll have to spring for private school tuition.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People in DC will continue to shop elsewhere, further reducing DC's tax base and ability to provide basic municipal services. It's a vicious cycle. WalMart isn't some great benevolent entity, but they are someone willing to invest lots of $, employ lots of people (albeit not at first year associate wages), and provide needed taxes and development in poorer communities.

What? the problem is that Wal-mart ends up costing municipalities due to the fact that their employees end up relying on social services because of their low wages and terrible benefits.

Well you could look at the walmart wage as a credit to the amount being paid now to people on welfare etc.

[Anonymous]

Ok this thread is off the rails with a lot of posters swearing at each other, but I don't understand why anyone would actually want to LIVE by a Walmart. That would be a total negative to me. Wegmans, on the other hand, bring it on. Come to Silver Spring, please!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:PP, have you never looked around the area by the Target in DC? There is a CVS across the street, a Bed Bath and Beyond in the same complex as well as a Best Buy. All of the things you can buy in those stores you can also buy in the Target but they still want to be near the Target anyway because they know that people shop at different places. A Walmart would be the same way. Also, if you have ever been to any of the Walmart heavy areas in the burbs/smaller cities you would know that there are always lots of other retail options right near the Walmart. My Sister is in Columbia South Carolina and they have tons of Walmarts and also nearby grocery stores from other chains, drugstores, and on and on. The idea that nothing will locate near a Walmart is just not true at all.

Target is not Walmart though.

Target does offer the same rock bottom prices.

Target is markets to and attracts a different population - they kind of population with disposable income.

I can't say for sure but I am willing to bet that all those stores you named were there prior to the Target opening.

Walmart in more affluent areas - yes they will have other retailers around them. This is true for example out in Fair Lakes (Fairfax, VA). But that's a much different population of people. Most noteably they have much higher disposable income to spread around. That was not going to be the case in DC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Walmart is not a plus in an already vibrant low price shopping corridor. Maybe high SES people will feel more comfortable shopping at Walmart, however, there are a number of "dollar' type stores in the area already selling low cost goods or cheap junk-your choice. Walmart got city concessions and did not offer any. Given how much we taxpayers will pay for Walmart, its employees' health care needs with little return, the bill will help protect DC's citizens in many ways.

Exactly what concessions did Walmart receive? I was under the impression they were not given any tax incentives to come into the cit. Costco is s a different story however. The city paid or the roads and new sewers for Costco, but I don't recall the same legislation o Walmart.

I stand corrected; Walmart did not ask for special concessions. Thank you. At the same time, they do soak up public dollars with low wages, hiring many part timers and not providing affordable health care. My other point stand.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The problem just isn't walmart it is that dc is setting up anti business rules against large businesses. This is going to have a ripple effect on other companies like costco, target etc.

Costco is already paying its employees a living wage, because it is not run by disgusting, soul-sucking scumbags like Walmart is.

Sorry, off-topic.

You have to pass a credit check and earn a membership card at Costco. Then when you shop you have to use Amex or cash. Minimizes riffraff, stolen goods, and shrinkage.

Anyhow, DC is anti biz, pro unions and will continue on its high tax, high govt aid death spiral. No economic activity here!

[Anonymous]

God forbid, pro-union! I mean, supporting higher wages for hard-working residents, what a sham!

BTW, many Costcos are unionized. Don't know if the DC one is. Unionized shops are exempt from the bill.

[Anonymous]

DC would rather pay people to stay on welfare rather than work. Congrats

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:DC would rather pay people to stay on welfare rather than work. Congrats

People who work at Walmart don't make enough to get off welfare and other benefits. Walmart is no longer even hiring full-time workers.

[Anonymous]

It's true. Walmart will schedule people right up to the limit so they don't have to offer benefits. It is a corrupt and greedy company. Its employees are holding one-day strikes all across the country right now. Visit http://forrespect.org/ to learn more.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:DC minimum wage is NOT 12.50, I don't know why someone wrote that. I also think people need to distinguish between West of the Park and East of the River. Walmart coming or not coming has zero impact on the neighborhoods east of the park. However, its a huge loss to east of the river of folks where there is almost no retail particularly full size grocery stores. I live in Petworth (on Ga ave for those of you who dont cross the park) and the washington business journal just did a story on Petworth being the hottest neighborhood in the area based on year over year increases. My own house has appreciated from 540k to $780 k in two years and I can assure you it has nothing to do with walmart.

I am East of the River and we have a Safeway and a Giant that are both fairly new, in addition to another Giant on the DC/MD line. We don't need a Walmart, we need restaurants and entertainment in the area.

[Anonymous]

PP here. That's in Ward 8. Ward 7 has a Safeway as well.