The District's first major big box discount retailer opened in 2008 just blocks from Mount Pleasant. Target is the anchor of Columbia Height's DCUSA development. Any questions about being profitable in an urban location were answered quickly. It has been busy daily from day one. Bed Bath & Beyond, Best Buy, Marshalls and Staples are other big box national chains operating in DCUSA.
Now Walmart is attempting to get into the mix. Only six months after news of Costo's plans to open in DC, Walmart may very well join them in Northeast. The world's largest retailer is banking on several perceived advantages in attempting to penetrate the urban market in cities like DC, Boston and Chicago. 1)They're following Target and Costo. 2)They'll play up the "creating jobs" factor. 3)They'll argue that residents in cities like DC are undeserved, especially regarding full service groceries. The location would be an 11 acre parcel on a triangle shaped piece of land bound by Montana Ave NE, New York Ave NE and Bladensburg Rd. Google map of the site is below.
Will Walmart have to concede the Superstore model and settle for a smaller store in DC? The Target store in Columbia Heights is 180,000 square feet, which is actually larger than the average. However the DC store is two floors. The average Walmart Supercenter store is 185,000 sq feet, but almost always on one floor, and almost always accompanied by a large parking lot. The NE store would be one floor and include parking.
Of course the big questions will be the result of community wants, needs and input. Who wants it, who doesn't and who's indifferent. And will the city be as financially involved as they are with DCUSA?: essentially building and operating the parking facilities for the mall, making road and landscape improvements and brokering deals to get specific desired retailers to join the shopping center. Very interesting development for the city and Walmart. The outcome will certainly set precedent for both entities.
Proposed site:
View Larger Map
9 comments:
why is everyone saying the wal-mart would be one story with a sea of parking? the whole thing is speculation right now (though likely to be built), but there have been no plans submitted regarding the design of the store.
who's to say that we (the people of DC and our government) can't ask, require, and code for urban infill design on this parcel? it's disheartening to see writers all over the local blogosphere discuss the suburban paradigm as a fait accompli.
speculation, yes. that's all it is. good question though. i suppose i assume because WM seems less willing to modify the model than others. but as you say, anything is possible; if this deal is even made.
A one-story Walmart with a sea of parking would be appropriate for this location at this time. That location is an isolated no man's land. It is not near metro or even a planned streetcar line. Nor is it surrounded by walkable neighborhoods the way Columbia Heights is.
Let Walmart develop by right whatever plans they have. It will be a good place holder for 20 years the way the strip malls at Potomac Yards have been in Alexandria. Unlike some uses it's been proven all across the country that strip malls aren't difficult to repurpose when the market conditions dictate the timing is right.
The time will come for this parcel to be something more ambitious. But it is a mistake to think "the time is now" for every inch of the city.
paul: why shouldn't they at least build in a footprint that makes it easier to properly develop around it?
i agree that the perfect should not be the enemy of the good, but there's no reason to make 'terrible' worth settling for.
and sure, it's not as dense as columbia heights, but there are still many neighborhoods within walking distance of that spot. i feel that a lot of people choose to ignore the people that do live in close proximity to the site, since those neighborhoods aren't fashionable right now.
The parcel is bounded by the National Arboretum, Mount Olivet Cemetary and railroad tracks to the north. It is no man's land. It's not a matter of ignoring the type of demographic that's presently there. It's that practically no body lives there.
You can't just plop down an island of walkability density anywhere in DC. It's got to have connectivity to other places worth walking to - preferably in two or more directions. People bought in Logan in the '90s because they could walk to DuPont, people buy in Near Southeast because they can walk to Barracks Row, and people buy in Mt Vernon Triangle because they can walk to Penn Quarter and Chinatown.
Maybe in 15-20 years as other parts of the city get maxed out there will be a reason to develop a small area plan for Bladensburg Rd. But we're no where near that point.
paul: there is an arboretum neighborhood. there is ivy city, there is trinidad. there is also south central, woodridge, and langdon...all are walkable from this site.
regardless, we're not going to agree on this, so i'll let it go. i fundamentally believe in building things close to right the first time. you believe we can build something there and then tear it down when the time comes to change.
i believe that inertia will likely keep the space from ever being developed very different from how it'll be done now, and i believe that it's a waste to build things in a way that wastes material, energy, etc. fundamental difference of opinion.
Arboretum neighborhood? Are you talking about those 5 blocks of rowhouses to the south? Sorry, but that's a drop in the bucket and doesn't come close to being helpful to inducing demand for this parcel to be something robust.
paul: yes, there is a neighborhood called arboretum. i never said they alone could induce demand for a big box superstore. you said that practically nobody lives nearby, and i was giving examples of people who do.
When are the naming rights for the neighborhood going on the auction block? "Yeah, I'm taking 'Strayer University Metro' to 'Costcopia Heights' to get some 'ethnic' food at Chipotle! Yum!"
Post a Comment