My Photo

July 2019

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31      
Sign Up Now

Become a Fan

« Tracking: Liturgy | Main | Tonight! Bar Bacon V2 Round 2 »



There is NOT a Wal-Mart in DC. So whatever that quote is about it is misleading.


It's not misleading. That developer built a similar project in DC, regardless of who their tenants are. The quote speaks to the quality of developments this particular developer does.

That's pretty clear in the write up.



I will do what i can immediately. I think a lot of people are only thinking about short-term convenience and not about long-term disaster. Every store in Hampden, Charles Village, etc. is threatened by this. We could lose all that makes us unique if we don't fight.


Walmart is a welcome addition to this part of the city. It brings tax revenue, jobs and a convienent place to purchase basic necessities - all things the city desperately needs. Its a great vote of confidence for Baltimore that two major national retailers want to invest in our city.

If I were out of a job (like so many of our residents these days), I'd love the opportunity to work at either Walmart or Lowes.


That comment is so messed up in so many ways...

So, I'm just gonna call "bullshit" on it.

Wal-Mart is NOT a welcome addition to this part of the city.

It doesn't bring tax revenue. In fact, it decreases tax revenue. And it creates strain on social programs and regional infrastructure that the taxpayer has to cover.

It doesn't create jobs. It kills better jobs already in existence.

And if you had even a fundamental understanding of how business works instead of using it to somehow validate your low self-esteem you'd realize that it's not about votes of confidence. It's about exploiting business opportunities. There's a reason this is happening in Remington and not Canton.

It's predatory.

And if you'd love the opportunity to work at a Wal-Mart, you're a fool. Unless you enjoy food stamps, no health coverage, having life insurance policies taken out on you by your employer and being told how to vote.

Your comments, "NotaHampdeHipster" (what the hell is that name even supposed to mean) are just completely asinine.

Or, perhaps, agenda laden.

Wal-Mart, like Lowes (and most big box retailers) is a predatory and destructive business whose presence will severely alter the face of North Baltimore - and not in a positive way.


There is someone circulating the blogs and news articles on this trying to frame anyone not thrilled with walmart as a neighbor as "anti-development" and "hipster". This looks like a hit job by corporate development PR goons. This kind of thing only happens on anonymous posts when a company has a big profit margin at stake. The profit margin has to come from somewhere. You put two and two together and guess where.

Alexander D. Mitchell IV

I will say here what I said in other blog comments:

Propose a viable alternative. Propose a development with private investment that would generate an equivalent number of jobs, income, and taxes (real estate, commercial, income, etc.).

Every other alternative development I have heard so far--swimming center, park, university campus, etc.--would also cost the city dearly in indirect subsidies, lost tax revenue, etc. And I don't exactly see anyone beating down the doors to bring dollars into the area.

You want stale bread, old milk, seedy saloons, take-outs with bullet-proof glass, and the like? Maintain the status quo and corner stores. The arabbers and sweatshops cranking out shirtwaists aren't coming back. Neither is the Sears Catalog or the general stores.


Commenters who keep pointing to the awesome tax revenues that WalMart will generate are missing an important point:

Here it is again: WalMart won't make the city money. It will COST the city money.

And NotAHampdenHipster sure sounds like someone who stands to gain from WalMart on 25th Street.

Rusty Chompers

Alexander - it's not our job to come up with viable proposals for the neighborhood, that is the job of the developers and urban planners. And so far, what they've proposed isn't acceptable to me or many of my neighbors.

Nice characterization of the area too. I guess you could point to The Dizz or Charm City Cakes or Book Row or the Ottobar or the Millers Ct. project or the whole Station North corridor or... well, you get the point. But interesting how you seem to think that the whole area is "seedy saloons" and "take-outs with bulletproof glass". That characterization is simply false - and can you cite studies that show a Wal-Mart would cause these places to be replaced with something you deem nicer? You can't.

Wal-Mart is a giant, parasitic, financial suck on the area.

So if developers want us to give them permission to use this land for something it's not zoned for (and for this to happen, that is what they need), they need to try again. It's really that simple. We don't need to come up with something better.

Your attempt to contextualize this as "it's this or nothing" is as mistaken as your belief that it's up to us to do the job of these developers.

But frankly, as a resident, I'd rather have nothing.

We can't afford Wal-Mart.


another view could see this as an opportunity for local businesses to compete at a higher level. Even if the was a home depot or kmart on 25th street i would bet a lot of people would still go to a local hardware store like Faulkenhans because you don't have to walk 8 miles to find a hose washer and they are willing to lend you tools as long as you promise to return them. People don't go to one of the three comic book stores that are within one mile of each other in hampden because there is no Barnes and Noble nearby, they go because the business realize they have to offer a competitive reason to exist near each other and still manage to please the marketplace. To be clear, I don't support having a giant box store in my hood, but i would be worried if local businesses are so worried about having to be innovative and competitive in the marketplace, that they instead need to rely on protectionist government interaction that artificially alter the marketplace to accomodate one party's business model. At the end of the day, that's just monopoly rent behavior that ends up benefiting no one. I think there are enough unique and engaging enterprises here that have plenty of reasons to be competitive against giant distasteful national corporate megastores

The comments to this entry are closed.