Urban planning community

+ Reply to thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 36

Thread: Shopping centers affected by the current economy...

  1. #1
    BANNED
    Registered
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Templeton, Ca
    Posts
    417

    Shopping centers affected by the current economy...

    Okay, I just think in this new economy that shopping centers might be going out of business. I know some areas are still getting shopping centers built, but for the majority part I think no new shopping centers are going to be built for a while in California.

    I think all the smaller big-box stores aren't doing so well. The larger giants like Wal-Mart are fine though.

    For instance, they will be finishing building a Lowe's in my area this Summer. That center has 23 vacancies. I don't think the rest of the project will be leased out. I think we may just get a Lowe's. There are also 2 other projects in the air, a Target in San Luis Obispo (having issues gettting approval now) and a Super Wal-Mart in Atascadero.The Super Wal-Mart could have problems getting passed if no one will pay to fix traffic congestion the store will cause. Plus, the city might not need the tax revenue from Super Wal-Mart if the new theater under construction provides enough revenue to sustain the city.

    Single-standing retail giants I think are more popular now.

  2. #2
    Cyburbian Raf's avatar
    Registered
    Feb 2007
    Location
    America's Happiest City
    Posts
    4,903
    Thanks for the news report..from 3 months ago
    Men do dumb $hit... it is what they do to correct the problem that counts.

  3. #3
    Cyburbian Cardinal's avatar
    Registered
    Aug 2001
    Location
    The Cheese State
    Posts
    9,920
    Yeah, the news for the retail industry is bad all around - but it began to surface two years ago. I just wrote an article that began by summarizing these conditions:

    - sales down 2.7 percent and expected to continue to decline
    - 148,000 stores closing in 2008 and 200,000 anticipated in 2009
    - vacancies of 7.1 percent at regional malls and 8.3 percent in community and neighborhood centers
    - vacancies of 10-20 percent expected, depending on center type (actually, I anticipate this will be higher)
    - declining commercial rents
    - an expected 300 percent increase in commercial mortgage delinquencies
    - an expected drop in commercial property values of 21 to 26 percent

    Although not mentioned in the article, you could also include the dramatic loss of stock value among the large commercial property owners. This has pretty much put an end to their renovation and expansion plans.

    The market shake-out is going to be severe. I expect the hardest hit will be the mid-box retailers, specialty stores in clothing and home furnishings, and department store. The latter two will impact regional malls, and I expect we will see a few ultimately go dark. The former are more interesting. They are found in the community "power centers" and to a lesser extent in neighborhood centers where there was som much new construction during the 1990's and 2000's. With fewer of these chains remaining, there is a real question about who may fill the space that is too big for most specialty retailers, and too small for current discount store formats. But then, how many discount stores can we support?

    All of this leads to my theory that communities are going to be faced with a daunting task of redeveloping newer strip/power centers that outlive their market even though they may be less than a decade old.
    Anyone want to adopt a dog?

  4. #4
    Cyburbian rcgplanner's avatar
    Registered
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Back in SE Texas
    Posts
    1,660
    In the community I work for we have a large center with a Super Target, a Barnes and Noble and several other retailers. Most of the center is doing well, but we have lost one large tenant, a stand alone Sofa Express It went out of business about 18 months ago, the store is still empty, but was used this past fall as a Halloween store for 2 months. We recently lost Linens and Things in the same center. I think until the economy turns around, we are not going to see these vacant storefronts occupied.

    If the rest of the center can survive, it may be well poised for new development after the economy turns around, especially if energy prices increase. I tend to dislike these typical 'suburban' developments, but these do serve as an important one-stop shopping destination in communities. Now if developers actually worked to make these developments walkable so patrons wouldn't have to get in their car to go from one end of the center to the other.

    Now the thing that surprises me is how many banks are still being built. For how "bad of shape" the banking industry is in, they still seem to be building banks. The community I work in has at least 10 banks for a community of 10,000 people, including 2 that were built in the last year. We have another bank that is beginning the approval process. I guess the banks have done their market research, but I am still surprised they are building while having their hands out to the government.

  5. #5
    BANNED
    Registered
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Templeton, Ca
    Posts
    417
    Quote Originally posted by Cardinal View post
    Yeah, the news for the retail industry is bad all around - but it began to surface two years ago. I just wrote an article that began by summarizing these conditions:

    - sales down 2.7 percent and expected to continue to decline
    - 148,000 stores closing in 2008 and 200,000 anticipated in 2009
    - vacancies of 7.1 percent at regional malls and 8.3 percent in community and neighborhood centers
    - vacancies of 10-20 percent expected, depending on center type (actually, I anticipate this will be higher)
    - declining commercial rents
    - an expected 300 percent increase in commercial mortgage delinquencies
    - an expected drop in commercial property values of 21 to 26 percent

    Although not mentioned in the article, you could also include the dramatic loss of stock value among the large commercial property owners. This has pretty much put an end to their renovation and expansion plans.

    The market shake-out is going to be severe. I expect the hardest hit will be the mid-box retailers, specialty stores in clothing and home furnishings, and department store. The latter two will impact regional malls, and I expect we will see a few ultimately go dark. The former are more interesting. They are found in the community "power centers" and to a lesser extent in neighborhood centers where there was som much new construction during the 1990's and 2000's. With fewer of these chains remaining, there is a real question about who may fill the space that is too big for most specialty retailers, and too small for current discount store formats. But then, how many discount stores can we support?

    All of this leads to my theory that communities are going to be faced with a daunting task of redeveloping newer strip/power centers that outlive their market even though they may be less than a decade old.
    Yeah, I started thinking about how to deal with the redevelopment of all our shopping centers by thinking about what to do with the 600 empty starbucks stores. Duncin Donuts said they want to replace the store.

    The key to replacing many of the stores will be when the economy stabilizes is that we need to get in more chains from other parts of the nation, and perhaps some out-of-nation stores. Perhaps some stores from canada and mexico. And ask for our malls we could start filling them with big-box stores.

    And my thoughts on new shopping centers are that there will be no new ones. Instead we are going to see more free-standing retail giants. Free standing super target, super wal-mart, and free standing home improvement big-box stores. This recession has ultimately destroyed our past spending habits and urban sprawl. The shift of urban growth has been made into urban re-growth. Once the economy is stablized, and I repeat STABILIZED and NOT UP. We have to do alot of repairmen work, and regulate home prices better because the world is still growing with more people. There are people that will still need homes. Just, there isn't going to be too much housing development.

  6. #6
    Cyburbia Administrator Dan's avatar
    Registered
    Mar 1996
    Location
    Upstate New York
    Posts
    14,547
    Blog entries
    3
    In the community where I work, a very large mixed-use lifestyle center project was put on hold, and I'm not very optimistic that it will be built after the recession; from what I've seen in other communities in the past, projects stalled by recessions usually don't resume after the storm has passed.

    It's also a middle-class food desert; 18,000 residents, with both Home Depot and Lowe's, but no supermarkets despite a high demand. My guess: the financing isn't out there, and the two major grocery store chains in the Austin area (H-E-B has 70% of the market) fear cannibalization from existing stores that are a 15 minute drive away. The area doesn't have the demographics to support an upscale/organic grocer like Whole Foods or Central Market, nor a downscale chain like Sav-a-Lot.

    There's interest in smaller projects (gas stations, small office buildings, etc), but large-scale retail is another story.

    Although Austin hasn't been hit as hard as other regions, I'm still seeing a lot of vacant parcels with "future shopping center" signs, and no activity. Seems like projects that started before the crisis hit are continuing, and the parking lots at many retail centers are full, but there's little new retail development breaking ground.

    Some things to contemplate: when I worked in the Denver area in the late 1990s and early 2000s, the aftermath of the late 1970s bust was still in the air, nearly empty office parks laid out during the boom were just beginning to see activity again, and the sight of multi-tenant shopping centers built between 1980 and 1995 were unusual. Also consider that the Manhattan skyline remained essentially unchanged from the 1930s to the mid-1960s. Somewhere on my hard drive, I've got an oblique photo of midtown Manhattan from 1960, and there's almost no post-WWII buildings to be seen. It's like there was a 30 year gap when almost nothing was built in Manhattan, relatively speaking.

    EDIT: found some images of post-WWII midtown Manhattan:

    1957: http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1417/...e5aa42d9_o.jpg
    1959: http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3082/...6a528e.jpg?v=0

    Except for a few buildings south of Central Park, it could just as well be a photo from 1932.
    Growth for growth's sake is the ideology of the cancer cell. -- Edward Abbey

  7. #7
    BANNED
    Registered
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Templeton, Ca
    Posts
    417
    Quote Originally posted by Dan View post
    In the community where I work, a very large mixed-use lifestyle center project was put on hold, and I'm not very optimistic that it will be built after the recession; from what I've seen in other communities in the past, projects stalled by recessions usually don't resume after the storm has passed.

    It's also a middle-class food desert; 18,000 residents, with both Home Depot and Lowe's, but no supermarkets despite a high demand. My guess: the financing isn't out there, and the two major grocery store chains in the Austin area (H-E-B has 70% of the market) fear cannibalization from existing stores that are a 15 minute drive away. The area doesn't have the demographics to support an upscale/organic grocer like Whole Foods or Central Market, nor a downscale chain like Sav-a-Lot.

    There's interest in smaller projects (gas stations, small office buildings, etc), but large-scale retail is another story.

    Although Austin hasn't been hit as hard as other regions, I'm still seeing a lot of vacant parcels with "future shopping center" signs, and no activity. Seems like projects that started before the crisis hit are continuing, and the parking lots at many retail centers are full, but there's little new retail development breaking ground.
    Dan, I completely agree with you. If a project isn't already getting built, then it probably won't be built after our recession. I think after this recession the economy will just be stable, not going up or down. I don't see the economy being up until 2012. And in 2012, I don't think there will be a lot of urban sprawl-shopping center wise. I just think in 2012 we will see some housing growth continue.

    I think all the shopping centers in my area have become pipe dreams. The only projects that are going through are the ones that have already started construction:
    ~free standing Lowe's in Paso Robles
    ~a mix-used center in Atascadero with a 3 story building w/ a cinema, library, and offices

    Ones that won't go through because they haven't started construction or gotten approved yet:
    ~Prefumo Creek Commons (140,000sq. ft. Target, a pharmacy, and resturaunt)
    ~San Luis Obispo Promenade 2 (a hotel, Lowe's, and other stores)
    ~The Annex (Super Wal-Mart and a shopping center with smaller big-box stores)

    EDIT: Dan, the the Manhanttan example is perfect. After each crisis, there doesn't seem to any development for a long time running. After every war, after every economic crisis, etc..
    Last edited by urban19; 14 Feb 2009 at 4:54 PM.

  8. #8
    I dont get out to suburbs that much but in the cities I visit, vacancies are beginning to pop up. When in NYC right after New Years, I was struck by how many vacancies there were on Madison Avenue (the NY Times ran an article on this a week or so ago). Union Square in San Francisco, however, was virtually 100% occupied. here in Boston,vacancies are popping up on Newbury Street and downtown crossing, but the Pru and Copley place are still doing well.

  9. #9
    Cyburbian b3nr's avatar
    Registered
    Feb 2007
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    272
    I guess its a global thing...

    I obviously don't have figures, its just based on what i see and hear.

    Bristol, UK has just had a 500 million (around $800m?) new development, using some underused and derelict land on the edge of the city centre. Its certainly interesting architecturally, but the retailers are so high end it seems it might suffer in the medium term.

    Check out the roof: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cabot_Circus

    But its the older 80's style three level 'Mall' a few 100 yds south that seems to have suffered most already, a lot of the shops were closing down before and finally went just after christmas. Its like a ghost town in there on lunctimes...

    Oh the mediocrity:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mall_Galleries

    Funnily, its the older traditional 'high street' area that always seems to be busy and has fewer empty shops. : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broadmead#Broadmead

    The Cabot Circus development was very controversial, and some might rub there hands with glee as it appears more and more of a white elephant, but as someone who lives and works in the city, i'd rather see local jobs and a vibrant city centre

  10. #10
    Cyburbia Administrator Dan's avatar
    Registered
    Mar 1996
    Location
    Upstate New York
    Posts
    14,547
    Blog entries
    3
    Quote Originally posted by urban19 View post
    EDIT: Dan, the the Manhanttan example is perfect. After each crisis, there doesn't seem to any development for a long time running. After every war, after every economic crisis, etc..
    An interesting post I saw on a non-planning/skyscraper/armchair urbanist site:

    If there is one statistic that sums up the Depression era best to me, it's zero. As in, for about 20 years, not a single major building was erected in any downtown in America. Zero. Downtowns were the economic engine and symbol of America. Our skyscrapers were unique in the world. The twenty years before the Depression saw downtowns in every city in the country soar skyward.

    And then nothing.

    The Empire State Building was the last to go up. It became a symbol, all right, but a symbol of nothingness. For years it had so much trouble attracting any tenants that it was known as the Empty State Building. The next major structure in Manhattan didn't go up until the Lever House was built in 1951-2, and it was a relatively modest 21 stories. This in Manhattan.

    Take a look around the downtown of your city. Note how many new buildings there are, how many construction cranes. Now imagine all that stopping for 20 years. How old and outdated and shabby and defeated would that downtown appear to you in 2028 if not a single new building had done up in the interim. And for some downtowns, rebuilding didn't start until the late 1950s, making it a 30-year gap.

    That's how huge the Depression was.
    That's the way most of Aurora, Colorado and many other suburbs of Denver were in the late 1990s. Despite Denver's population growth, the bulk of the region appeared as if development activity froze in 1978, except for the occasional big box store or new chain here and there. Granted, it was very high-quality development by 1970s standards -- plenty of brick, plenty of landscaping, short signs, earth tone colors and the like -- and it was still very well maintained. In the mid-1990s, the commercial development scene warmed up again.

    Here's something a bit closer to home, in Buffalo, New York; aerial photos from the 1920s. See all the streets carved out in this photo? Development only began on them in the 1950s, 30 years after the photos were taken.

    In Cleveland, Shaker Heights was once envisioned to extend to the Chagrin River, about 10 miles east of the current city boundary. The developers of Shaker Heights, the Van Sweringen brothers, purchased thousands of acres of land, subdivided it, and built an extensive system of roads and parkways, expecting that it would be built out by 1940. It wasn't until the 1990s when the last lots of "Shaker Country Estates" were developed, and by then the land wasn't even part of the city of Shaker Heights, but suburbs that were formed later: Beachwood, Pepper Pike, and Gates Mills.

    I've spoken to many people that believe Cleveland really never recovered from the depression. In the 1920s, large apartment and office buildings were built far from downtown. By the time there was actually a demand for them, the neighborhoods those structures were in were part of Cleveland's growing East Side ghetto.
    Growth for growth's sake is the ideology of the cancer cell. -- Edward Abbey

  11. #11
    BANNED
    Registered
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Templeton, Ca
    Posts
    417
    Quote Originally posted by Dan View post
    An interesting post I saw on a non-planning/skyscraper/armchair urbanist site:



    That's the way most of Aurora, Colorado and many other suburbs of Denver were in the late 1990s. Despite Denver's population growth, the bulk of the region appeared as if development activity froze in 1978, except for the occasional big box store or new chain here and there. Granted, it was very high-quality development by 1970s standards -- plenty of brick, plenty of landscaping, short signs, earth tone colors and the like -- and it was still very well maintained. In the mid-1990s, the commercial development scene warmed up again.

    Here's something a bit closer to home, in Buffalo, New York; aerial photos from the 1920s. See all the streets carved out in this photo? Development only began on them in the 1950s, 30 years after the photos were taken.

    In Cleveland, Shaker Heights was once envisioned to extend to the Chagrin River, about 10 miles east of the current city boundary. The developers of Shaker Heights, the Van Sweringen brothers, purchased thousands of acres of land, subdivided it, and built an extensive system of roads and parkways, expecting that it would be built out by 1940. It wasn't until the 1990s when the last lots of "Shaker Country Estates" were developed, and by then the land wasn't even part of the city of Shaker Heights, but suburbs that were formed later: Beachwood, Pepper Pike, and Gates Mills.

    I've spoken to many people that believe Cleveland really never recovered from the depression. In the 1920s, large apartment and office buildings were built far from downtown. By the time there was actually a demand for them, the neighborhoods those structures were in were part of Cleveland's growing East Side ghetto.
    Wow, it blasts my mind away on how bad our current economic crisis is. It's as bad as the great depression, but not as long lasting.

    So many people don't realize how bad our economy is right now. And if California goes into a drought, then the nation is screwed even more. We all starves, and California goes broke and we all move out.

    Another thing about the downtowns, there are 3 types of downtowns I know of. The business downtown, old fashion downtown, and the upscale fashion downtown. The business downtowns and old fashion downtowns seem to be taking the biggest hit. In San Diego, when i was there in 2008 they had some unfinished large condos and some other big buildings and there seems to more vacancies as more big companies go out and less replacing them. The old downtowns aren't getting as much tourism and are losing local boutigue stores.

    The upscale fashion downtowns like San Francisco, Santa Barbara, San Luis Obispo, and Davis seem to be doing fine since the area's wealthy patriants, college students, and tourists are still shopping there. In fact, in San Luis Obispo the only four stores to go out were Linens N Things, Circuit City, one Albertsons, and Mervyns. And already all of these stores have replacements that are planning on coming in this year or next.

  12. #12
    Cyburbian rcgplanner's avatar
    Registered
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Back in SE Texas
    Posts
    1,660
    It does seem that the high-fashion areas do seem to be doing better. Both ends of the economy seem to be doing well. Everytime I drive by Aldi or Walmart the parking lots are packed. Same thing with Keystone Fashion Mall, an upscale mall here in Indianapolis.

    In the community I work, the new commercial centers that are in the pipe are being downsized. One project was orginally going to be a two-story strip center with offices on the top and retail on the bottom. It went back to the PC, because it was downsized to a single story 9000 sf project.

  13. #13
    BANNED
    Registered
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Templeton, Ca
    Posts
    417
    Quote Originally posted by rcgplanner View post
    It does seem that the high-fashion areas do seem to be doing better. Both ends of the economy seem to be doing well. Everytime I drive by Aldi or Walmart the parking lots are packed. Same thing with Keystone Fashion Mall, an upscale mall here in Indianapolis.

    In the community I work, the new commercial centers that are in the pipe are being downsized. One project was orginally going to be a two-story strip center with offices on the top and retail on the bottom. It went back to the PC, because it was downsized to a single story 9000 sf project.
    Yeah, I think the lower and upper class are fine. It's the biggest class, the middle class, that is being affected by this economy. Also, chains started in california are getting hurt bad.

  14. #14
    Cyburbian rcgplanner's avatar
    Registered
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Back in SE Texas
    Posts
    1,660
    Quote Originally posted by urban19 View post
    Yeah, I think the lower and upper class are fine. It's the biggest class, the middle class, that is being affected by this economy. Also, chains started in california are getting hurt bad.
    I think it is more of a general downward shifting in the economy. Many in the middle class are spending less or shopping at discount retailers.

    The people at the top either can afford to continue to shop at the high fashion areas, or the smaller numbers who have to shop at mid-level retailers are not enough to keep some retailers in business.
    Last edited by rcgplanner; 14 Feb 2009 at 10:03 PM. Reason: Finishing my thought.

  15. #15
    Before we start thinking that we are in the great depression remember that in that crisis unemployment went to 25%! (The highest unemployment today is only 7% and that is not everyplace. Most places are much lower. That does not even touch the double digit unemployment of the 70s.) There was NO social safety net. There was no FDIC protection on savings and most people invested in bank accounts in those days not the stock market. The money back then disappeared in a different way. The small investors put the money in their mattresses. The US at the time had not yet taken its place as a world power militarily or financially. NYC was not the world financial center until after WWII, London held that honor.

  16. #16
    Cyburbian Raf's avatar
    Registered
    Feb 2007
    Location
    America's Happiest City
    Posts
    4,903
    I agree with Steel. One needs to take a look at the numbers before saying we are in the midst of the "next great depression". In 2005, we had the most people employed ever in the history of our nation. Now we have an 8% unemployment rate nationwide (or 13% in my county here in cali). This 8% pales in comparison to the recession of the 1980's hell it is even is lower than the last recession of the early 90's that hit california hard. Yes, we will hit double digit nation wide unemployment, and yes this is effecting the consumer (even our family has scaled back spending significantly the last 6 months, and even more so now since my hours were cut back at work).

    Now back to the topic at hand. Yes shopping centers are suffering. Downtowns are suffering, but the reality is this, we do have an over-glut of commercials, however the shift towards power centers and one-stop shopping will continue and if not intensify as the consumer looks to the super wal-marts that provide more bang for the buck. Strip centers in suburbs are suffering the most plight as the consumers dollars have dried up, and no one is moving to them right now in such a poor business climate. Places like california will continue to build centers, even through these tough economic times because our cities/counties rely heavily on commercial centers like wal-mart for precious sales tax dollars. With Cities and Counties here hurting for revenue thanks to the collapse of the housing market and now commercial, more municipalities will be welcoming these big box discount centers with open arms in this economic climate because they so desperately need the money. This is the case here at least, but who knows how the recovery will be nationwide and how bad this hits the commercial/retail sector.
    Men do dumb $hit... it is what they do to correct the problem that counts.

  17. #17
    Dan Staley's avatar
    Registered
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Front Range, CO
    Posts
    294
    Quote Originally posted by steel View post
    (The highest unemployment today is only 7% and that is not everyplace. Most places are much lower. That does not even touch the double digit unemployment of the 70s.) .
    No.

    The fed gummint has jiggered with the way we count. The effective, real unemployment rate is twice that. Come now.

    but the reality is this, we do have an over-glut of commercials, however the shift towards power centers and one-stop shopping will continue and if not intensify as the consumer looks to the super wal-marts that provide more bang for the buck.
    Exactly. Our economy lately has been built on corporations separating folks from their savings - borrowing. And some will move to Wal-mart and some won't. IMHO it is the end of the line for people buying cr*p and trinkets from their savings, just to make themselves feel better or less inadequate. Will folks rebound and return to buying cr*p they don't need just so our "economy" can "flourish"? I hope not.

  18. #18
    Cyburbian jmello's avatar
    Registered
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Clayobyrne, CB
    Posts
    2,581
    Quote Originally posted by Dan View post
    It's also a middle-class food desert; 18,000 residents, with both Home Depot and Lowe's, but no supermarkets despite a high demand.
    Dan: take some of ours, please. Our city of 100,000 has 16 supermarkets within the city limits (not including super Walmart and Target). Some of them are within sight of each other. I have never seen a place with more supermarkets.

    We have a relatively new mixed-use development which includes a sizeable neo-tradiational retail and residential component surrounded by multi-family residential and O&I pods. Half of the lots are still vacant and a few of the stores in the retail area have already come and gone. I wonder about the future of this area, which seems to be saturated with retail and restaurants.

  19. #19
    Cyburbian illinoisplanner's avatar
    Registered
    May 2005
    Location
    The Fox Valley
    Posts
    4,664
    Blog entries
    1
    Miraculously, a power center constructed last year in the town I work for is still seeing its anchor tenants continue to move in at the beginning of this year. But only one of five outlots is developed, and I think it could be some time yet before we see any more restaurants or small shops.

    In the meantime, Circuit City leaving will create another vacancy in a lifestyle center hit hard by nationwide bankruptcies of several stores. It's still a pretty strong center that's packed on the weekends and pretty stable during the week (see the "Neverending Dating thread" about how I experienced difficulties finding parking and hour & fifteen minute waits at restaruants), but this will bring the 2 anchor vacancies up to three now. The center is still pretty full, with about 70 tenants out of 80 possible stores, but it could do better.

    Another lifestyle center has all but come to a halt. It was supposed to be built in three phases over about 5 years. Phase I is only about half full though. Now, I don't expect that thing to be totally complete for about 10 years. However, the stores that are currently there are thriving pretty well.

    Also, it should be noted that Wal-Mart Supercenters are popping up all over the place near me.
    "Life's a journey, not a destination"
    -Steven Tyler

  20. #20
    Cyburbian CJC's avatar
    Registered
    Feb 2007
    Location
    San Francisco, CA
    Posts
    1,689
    One funny bit of news regarding retail in the Mission District of San Francisco - this was just a week or two ago:

    http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...MN6M15P43V.DTL

    An excerpt:

    The hoot, of course, is that many of the vociferous opponents of the store admit that they buy and wear American Apparel clothing. Some of them wore it to the City Planning Commission meeting to argue against the store opening in their neighborhood.

    "Everyone I know is wearing an American Apparel T-shirt right now," said Chicken John Rinaldi, one of the protest organizers. "I wear one every day."

    It's another through-the-looking-glass moment in San Francisco. They love the product but hate the store solely because there are about 260 of them worldwide. That means it's a chain and unwelcome under any circumstances.

    By a 7-0 vote - including staunch Republican Michael Antonini - the Planning Commission refused to grant the company a conditional use permit.

    This only reinforces San Francisco's reputation as America's squeaky-wheel city. If you can get 200 people together and persuade them to show up at a meeting and raise a fuss, you can stop damn near anything in this town. At some point, someone is going to have to stand up and say we've had enough of government dominated by small groups of shouting people.

    I am not holding my breath.

    "I'm scratching my head on this one," said Steve Adams, president of the Merchants of Upper Market and Castro. "There was all this opposition to American Apparel, saying that you need to be socially conscious. Well, they are. They pay their workers more, they have a health plan and they opposed Prop. 8. I'm still trying to figure this one out."

    Opponents see it all in black and white. At Thursday night's Planning Commission meeting, public comment on American Apparel ran for about three hours. They railed against retail chain stores as if they were polyester golf pants. One called it "the beginning of the end of Valencia Street," and another warned ominously of allowing "these parasitic entities to come in."
    Two wrongs don't necessarily make a right, but three lefts do.

  21. #21
    BANNED
    Registered
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Templeton, Ca
    Posts
    417
    Quote Originally posted by CJC View post
    One funny bit of news regarding retail in the Mission District of San Francisco - this was just a week or two ago:

    http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...MN6M15P43V.DTL

    An excerpt:
    Sounds like all the anti wal-mart people. In Atascadero, they had a vote on trying to ban basically super wal-mart, super target, super k-mart, etc... and it lose big time. 25 wanted the shield atascadero initiative and 75 said they didn't. And now, they is absolutely no way the wal-mart can be built in this economy. the project calls for a interchange and traffic adjustments. No one wants to pay for it, and the city can't pay for it. My guess is the city will pass it without the interchange or just say the new theater will bring in enough tax revenue to live by.

    This is also the same for the Prefumo Creek Commons project in San Luis Obispo. Madonna Enterprises is financially not doing well, and so then comes along some anti-growth citizens saying it's destroying our last amount of farm land, and then delays the project and then will cause Target to not await around with the project. If Target leaves the project, then the project just dies.

    This leads me to believe that Lowe's and the new theater in Atascadero already under construction will be the only new retail centers going up for a while. I don't think the other projects will resume for a while now.

    Another huge project biting the dust is the Seaside Main Gate Center, a huge lifestyle shopping center at the Fort Ord property in Seaside. The city council has put this project on hold because they don't have the money to build traffic adjustments on the 101 freeway.

    Also, on hold is a huge lifestyle center in Inglewood, Ca. There is just not enough money for the cities to build new shopping centers. Who has the money to shop at higher end lifestyle centers these days anyways? Who needs another Super Wal-Mart when you can come up with alternative ways to make tax revenue - a mix used center with a theater is good enough?

    I think California's commercial growth is done for a while. California middle-class took a huge hit, and it's time for us to focus on planning things out better for a better future. I think other nations will have more commercial growth because they didn't get into a big mess like California did.
    Last edited by urban19; 16 Feb 2009 at 9:38 PM.

  22. #22
    Cyburbian Raf's avatar
    Registered
    Feb 2007
    Location
    America's Happiest City
    Posts
    4,903
    Quote Originally posted by urban19 View post
    Another huge project biting the dust is the Seaside Main Gate Center, a huge lifestyle shopping center at the Fort Ord property in Seaside. The city council has put this project on hold because they don't have the money to build traffic adjustments on the 101 freeway.
    I am struck by this because majority of applicants pay for roadway improvements based on traffic impact studies done as a part of the analysis. If the project applicant walked away because of the amount traffic impacts identified by the study, as well as what the city was requiring and not willing to pony up, than that's a different story. Do you have a link you can send our way?

    Quote Originally posted by urban19 View post
    Also, on hold is a huge lifestyle center in Inglewood, Ca. There is just not enough money for the cities to build new shopping centers.
    Remember, Cities/Counties don't build centers, developers do unless the center is built through a partenership with a developer and RDA funds.


    Quote Originally posted by urban19 View post
    Who has the money to shop at higher end lifestyle centers these days anyways? Who needs another Super Wal-Mart when you can come up with alternative ways to make tax revenue - a mix used center with a theater is good enough?
    Not really. It's been a proven fact that in california, retail centers such as wal-mart and car dealerships bring in the most revenue for each municipalities. Which is why some cities offer tax breaks and other incentives to lure such developments.

    Quote Originally posted by urban19 View post
    I think California's commercial growth is done for a while. California middle-class took a huge hit,
    Not necessarily true. A few communities near where i live are still building centers and are planning new ones. Wal-mart has put in fresh applications in Elk Grove and Patterson to build super centers and although Roseville and Folsom have slowed down, they are still pushing huge commercial/retail development in the region.

    Quote Originally posted by urban19 View post
    I think other nations will have more commercial growth because they didn't get into a big mess like California did.
    As stated in this thread, the commercial shopping center issues are nationwide, not just a california thing as Cardinal and others can attest to. Plus remember, this is a global recession, not a california one. Just trying to help you along with your posts to give you a little bit more planning knowledge in this state.
    Men do dumb $hit... it is what they do to correct the problem that counts.

  23. #23
    BANNED
    Registered
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Templeton, Ca
    Posts
    417
    Quote Originally posted by CPSURaf View post
    I am struck by this because majority of applicants pay for roadway improvements based on traffic impact studies done as a part of the analysis. If the project applicant walked away because of the amount traffic impacts identified by the study, as well as what the city was requiring and not willing to pony up, than that's a different story. Do you have a link you can send our way?


    Remember, Cities/Counties don't build centers, developers do unless the center is built through a partenership with a developer and RDA funds.




    Not really. It's been a proven fact that in california, retail centers such as wal-mart and car dealerships bring in the most revenue for each municipalities. Which is why some cities offer tax breaks and other incentives to lure such developments.


    Not necessarily true. A few communities near where i live are still building centers and are planning new ones. Wal-mart has put in fresh applications in Elk Grove and Patterson to build super centers and although Roseville and Folsom have slowed down, they are still pushing huge commercial/retail development in the region.



    As stated in this thread, the commercial shopping center issues are nationwide, not just a california thing as Cardinal and others can attest to. Plus remember, this is a global recession, not a california one. Just trying to help you along with your posts to give you a little bit more planning knowledge in this state.
    http://www.montereycountyweekly.com/...3726/1/@@index

    http://www.ci.seaside.ca.us/agendas%...C_05.01.08.pdf

    I guess the city of Seaside is trying to reach an agreement with the developers of the cost the project will have on traffic adjustments and on everything. It's kind of like the situation Atascadero has. They are waiting to see how much the road improvements will cost from the EIR. Seaside and Atascadero are cities trying to revitalize their downtown, and they don't have much money. So it's hard for me to see those cities getitng enough money to finance those projects through.

    CPSURaf, I'm glad you're optomistic for growth of shopping centers still in california. I just see that california is worse off than the rest of the nation, and i dont think more urban sprawl is going to happen, and i dont think more urban sprawl will help our situation.

  24. #24
    Cyburbian Cardinal's avatar
    Registered
    Aug 2001
    Location
    The Cheese State
    Posts
    9,920
    Quote Originally posted by urban19 View post
    CPSURaf, I'm glad you're optomistic for growth of shopping centers still in california. I just see that california is worse off than the rest of the nation, and i dont think more urban sprawl is going to happen, and i dont think more urban sprawl will help our situation.
    Is California worse off than the rest of the nation? The reality is that the impacts of the recession are felt unevenly nationally and within individual states. California has some of the most-impacted communities, such as Stockton and Modesto. They are about as bad as some cities in Florida, Ohio, or Massachusetts. Then again, California has some communities that are certainly less affected, like San Diego, which is probably more similar to Denver or Boston.

    Overall, retail construction is slow everywhere. So is housing construction.
    Anyone want to adopt a dog?

  25. #25
    NIMBY asshatterer Plus Richmond Jake's avatar
    Registered
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Jukin' City
    Posts
    16,473
    Quote Originally posted by urban19 View post
    ...... They are waiting to see how much the road improvements will cost from the EIR. ......
    Off-topic:
    Did the CEQA process change since I left? When I was in the Golden State, the CEQA document (either a FEIR or a mitigated negative declaration), never identified the cost of the mitigation measures. But then I'm sure things have changed.

+ Reply to thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

More at Cyburbia

  1. Shopping Centers In Your Town
    Friday Afternoon Club
    Replies: 45
    Last post: 05 Apr 2011, 5:34 PM
  2. LEED shopping centers
    Environmental Planning
    Replies: 6
    Last post: 11 Feb 2009, 12:53 PM
  3. Planners and the current economy
    Friday Afternoon Club
    Replies: 9
    Last post: 03 Feb 2009, 8:45 AM
  4. Replies: 26
    Last post: 23 Oct 2005, 3:36 PM
  5. Replies: 7
    Last post: 19 Mar 2005, 12:47 PM