Armed Polite Society

Main Forums => The Roundtable => Topic started by: Manedwolf on December 31, 2008, 01:39:27 AM

Title: The problem with big box..architecture, not business.
Post by: Manedwolf on December 31, 2008, 01:39:27 AM
There's been a cause for concern among planners for a while now. See, this IS going to happen, and there's something different this time.

Quote
Dec. 29 (Bloomberg) -- U.S. retailers face a wave of store closings, bankruptcies and takeovers starting next month as holiday sales are shaping up to be the worst in 40 years.

Retailers may close 73,000 stores in the first half of 2009, according to the International Council of Shopping Centers. Talbots Inc. and Sears Holdings Corp. are among chains shuttering underperforming locations.

More than a dozen retailers, including Circuit City Stores Inc., Linens ‘n Things Inc., Sharper Image Corp. and Steve & Barry’s LLC, have sought bankruptcy protection this year as the credit squeeze and recession drained sales. Investors will start seeing a wide variety of chains seeking bankruptcy protection in February when they file financial reports, said Burt Flickinger.

“You’ll see department stores, specialty stores, discount stores, grocery stores, drugstores, major chains either multi- regionally or nationally go out,” Flickinger, managing director of Strategic Resource Group, a retail-industry consulting firm in New York, said today in a Bloomberg Radio interview. “There are a number that are real causes for concern.”

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aGQ__icNMvzI&refer=worldwide (http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aGQ__icNMvzI&refer=worldwide)

Yes, this has happened before, stores failed, they closed, and...their buildings, from brick to stone and the like were occupied, subdivided, and re-used by other stores.

A defunct bakery became a hat shop became a clothier became a hair salon became an agency became an office became a storefront church became a cafe became a... You get the idea, there.

Smaller stores are infinitely re-useable. Even supermarket size is. Malls are.

Big Box supercenter architecture? Not so much. Massive steel shell, massive parking lot, very expensive to heat and cool. When one folds, it tends to remain empty. And remain empty. And remain empty. If a whole bunch in an area do it, you have blight, parking lots with drifting trash, and...nothing.

It's really hard to re-use that architecture for something else, since they are built to each retailer's specs. You can tear them down, but then you have abandoned parking lots and feeder roads for a big thing that isn't there, and...well...it's going to be an ugly mess, I think.

Some planners have come up with an idea that if a big box is to be given special variances and breaks to come into a community, if it's going to require expenditure by that community for roads to make the traffic pattern work...that that retailer should sign a contract that if they close, they will clean up the mess, even knock down the building. That, or encourage the retailers to go for more re-useable architecture instead, things that are more easily divided, better insulated, more traditional in profile, not the massive empty shell that's left.

What do people think of that? I'm not sure, really.
Title: Re: The problem with big box..architecture, not business.
Post by: Hawkmoon on December 31, 2008, 02:07:20 AM
You are correct. The unspoken corollary to that is that the proliferation of big box retailing has decimated the traditional business districts of smaller towns and even mid-size cities. All those mom-and-pop stores that Wal-Mart put out of business left smaller buildings that aren't being reused because there's nobody walking on Main Street any more, so who in their right mind would open a shop where there are no customers?

In a perverse way, maybe the demise of some big box stores will lead to some revitalization of traditional "downtowns." (I hope.)
Title: Re: The problem with big box..architecture, not business.
Post by: White Horseradish on December 31, 2008, 04:53:55 AM
Sharper Image filed for bankruptcy?  Wow. A business specializing in the superfluous has a hard time. Whodathunkit.

As to the big box stores, it seems to me that if you reinforced one wall and got some shredded tires you could have a nice indoor range...
Title: Re: The problem with big box..architecture, not business.
Post by: Perd Hapley on December 31, 2008, 06:54:08 AM
What's the problem?  ???   :rolleyes:
Title: Re: The problem with big box..architecture, not business.
Post by: vaskidmark on December 31, 2008, 07:39:26 AM
I welcome the coming glut of big-box boxes becoming vacant.  They offer a multitude of opportunities for those with mildly creative imaginations and some familiarity with beauracracy.

Here are some possibilities:

1 - as more and more families become homeless when their bailout mortgages are forclosed upon, there will be an increased need for shelters that are not located in/near the still-existing residential neighborhoods.

2 - as #1 increases the availabilityof cheap labor that does not speak a totally foreign language will become more atractive.  (Add to that the "guest workers" are fleeing the sinking ship already!)  Concentrating that labor pool along existing highway infrastructure makes getting them to and from jobs more economical.  (Mass transportation finally catches on!)

3 - aggregating the newly poor reduces the amount of crime perpetrated against them, as well as reducing the number of police needed to provide protection from said crimes.  (Controlled access and wide avenues of approach - much as envisioned by L'Enfant when designing the streets of D.C., no?)

4 - as the economy and the mechanical infrastructure deteriorate, additional big-box boxes can be converted to provide additional alternate housing sites for those who are forced to relocate in order to be closer to the remaining food and medical-care distribution points.

and, most importantly,

Wednesday is Soylent Green! =D

Seriously, #1 thru #3 have been in the plans for contingency planning of local, state and federal government since the 1970's.  And if you  want to be really, really scared out of your wits, check your locality's plan for using the parking lots and the National Guard for temporary facilities in case of widespread civil disturbance.  Then check those plans against some planning that took place in the mid- to late-30's in Germany.  The level of coincidence is truely frightening - if only because there are so few changes made between the original documents and the current planning.

But #4 is the best reason.

stay safe.

skidmark
Title: Re: The problem with big box..architecture, not business.
Post by: mfree on December 31, 2008, 08:21:07 AM
"you have blight, parking lots with drifting trash, and...nothing. "

Not nothing; ask your local SCCA, it'll be a kickass autocross circuit until the pavement starts to degrade in a few years :)
Title: Re: The problem with big box..architecture, not business.
Post by: El Tejon on December 31, 2008, 08:25:09 AM
The two big boxes that closed to relocate here in Lafayette just became other business.

The Target became a Home Depot and the Wal-Mart box became a gym, health food store, video game store and Chinese restaurant.

I'm down with the indoor range solution!
Title: Re: The problem with big box..architecture, not business.
Post by: AZRedhawk44 on December 31, 2008, 09:32:48 AM
I have also seen big boxes re-purposed to other big box brands.

If in doubt, then WalMart can operate every BestBuy/HomeDepot/Lowes/Target/etc in the lower 48.  I have yet to see one of their stores close.
Title: Re: The problem with big box..architecture, not business.
Post by: Fly320s on December 31, 2008, 09:46:06 AM
I'm down with the indoor range solution!

Shoot yeah!  Indoor range, climbing gym, and sushi bar.
Title: Re: The problem with big box..architecture, not business.
Post by: mfree on December 31, 2008, 12:01:15 PM
Indoor "triathlon"... olympic swimming pool, leading to a climbing wall, and elevated on top of the wall (with stairs and elevator for those who just wanna shoot) is the firing range.
Title: Re: The problem with big box..architecture, not business.
Post by: Headless Thompson Gunner on December 31, 2008, 01:10:22 PM
Don't see much problem.  Large retail stores can be subdivided or rebuilt quite easily enough.  It happens all the time.  There's nothing special about big box retail space that says it must remain big box retail space forever.
Title: Re: The problem with big box..architecture, not business.
Post by: Zardozimo Oprah Bannedalas on December 31, 2008, 01:21:06 PM
Big buildings have that problem:
http://www.underthedome.com/2007/10/grim.html
Title: Re: The problem with big box..architecture, not business.
Post by: Perd Hapley on December 31, 2008, 01:28:18 PM
If in doubt, then WalMart can operate every BestBuy/HomeDepot/Lowes/Target/etc in the lower 48.  I have yet to see one of their stores close.

I saw one close in Washington, MO, when they opened the very first Wal-Mart Supercenter on the other side of the 47/100 intersection.  It was empty for a few years, I think, but it's been an Orscheln Farm and Home store for the past decade or so.  It's about fifteen miles from where I grew up, and down the street from my high school.  I think I've seen other, old, unsuper Wal-Marts go through the same thing.
Title: Re: The problem with big box..architecture, not business.
Post by: ilbob on December 31, 2008, 06:47:37 PM
There have been several big box stores close around here. Another closed recently. Only one or two were economic issues. The others were where the stores moved to a larger location.

Only one of them is still vacant.

Several of the large sites have been divided into smaller stores with no issues at all.

The real thing seems to be there are just too many retail sites. With people buying on the Internet, and some minor loss on sales, there is bound to be some contraction. On a percentage basis, the loss of big box stores is probably far less then a typical retail store or restaurant. I recall seeing the failure rate of small retail and restaurants is something like 80% don't make 3 years. I believe it. Its just more noticable when one of the big guys closes.
Title: Re: The problem with big box..architecture, not business.
Post by: Headless Thompson Gunner on December 31, 2008, 08:10:19 PM

The real thing seems to be there are just too many retail sites.
There was a bubble in commercial real estate, too.  It wasn't just homes.  There is definitely too much retail space out there right now.  Some of the commercial real estate guys I talk to are starting to whine about their market cap rates falling.  They're shocked and outraged that their profits are falling along with everyone else's.
Title: Re: The problem with big box..architecture, not business.
Post by: AJ Dual on December 31, 2008, 08:14:02 PM
But... but...  =|

If we don't have sufficient stock of empty big-boxes, and blight, where on earth will the Zaibatsu's and the mercenaries hired by the front company for a rouge AI of our dystopian near-future hold their gun battles, secret labs, or the quasi-feral techno sub-cultures find tribal space?

Okay... I read too much William Gibson for my own good.  :lol:

The ironic thing, is at least around here in the Milwaukee Metro, the remedy for "failed malls" (i.e. one thrown into a death-spiral by disaffected minority youth using it as a gathering place...) is to make them into joint parking lots for a few big-boxes and some connector strip-malls.

Title: Re: The problem with big box..architecture, not business.
Post by: Manedwolf on December 31, 2008, 08:16:45 PM
It might be regional, then. Near my parents in S. Florida, there's an abandoned Circuit City that has been empty for five years, as well as an empty B&N, likewise. Here, there's been a Shaws empty for years now, empty MVP, and now a bunch of empty Linens & Things.

I don't think you can do residential use of those...AFAIK, anyway. They're just thin steel buildings, usually, and they fly apart in tornadoes and hurricanes, and snowpack can bring down the roof in other areas. I've seen all of that occur.
Title: Re: The problem with big box..architecture, not business.
Post by: Matthew Carberry on December 31, 2008, 08:31:20 PM
Near my sister's home in NJ the local Home Depot moved less than a mile to a newer more upscale mall but continues to pay for their empty previous space simply to keep Lowe's from moving into it.

The mall they moved out of has several similar situations.

Anyway, years ago I sold high-end office systems furniture (Steelcase).  All the big manufacturers have modular wall systems with integrated HVAC, comm and power out that can convert any warehouse space into infinitely adjustable Class A office space in a minimal amount of time.

Those buildings won't be unused forever.
Title: Re: The problem with big box..architecture, not business.
Post by: Hawkmoon on January 01, 2009, 12:59:22 AM
Near my sister's home in NJ the local Home Depot moved less than a mile to a newer more upscale mall but continues to pay for their empty previous space simply to keep Lowe's from moving into it.

Yeah, that's another nasty tactic of the big box merchants. Never mind the problems an empty box creates, they'll pay good money to keep it empty. Wal-Mart did that for several years when a K-Mart near one of their stores here closed. Wal-Mart picked up the lease and refused to allow anything remotely in competition take over the space. They ultimately allowed Lowe's to raze the entire center and build a new Lowe's super home center -- which was much needed as a counterbalance to the wild proliferation of Home Depot stores around here.
Title: Re: The problem with big box..architecture, not business.
Post by: RevDisk on January 01, 2009, 03:21:20 AM

Supply and demand.  Buildings can be converted across functionality with more ease than most folks think.  I've seen old factories/warehouses turned into stores or apartments all the time in old steel towns here in PA.  And let's face it, ripping down a big box isn't that difficult.  Someone's always in the market for slabs of alumnimum, steel supports and decent ducting.  Concrete rumble is the only hitch, but you could use it for quasi clean fill.

It'll work itself out.  Worst case, big boxes will need an escrow account for removal costs prior to building a new store.
Title: Re: The problem with big box..architecture, not business.
Post by: Strings on January 01, 2009, 03:45:19 AM
Actually, I've seen FAR more of the "we want to keep the building (or lot) empty for a tax break" game around here...
Title: Re: The problem with big box..architecture, not business.
Post by: Perd Hapley on January 02, 2009, 01:48:25 PM
It might be regional, then.

No, it's not regional.  It's just that you aren't looking at the big picture.  As some of us have been pointing out, large buildings and large stores have been around for much longer than the current "big box" trend.  That's why so many stories (written or filmed) have the "abandoned warehouse" cliche - this is nothing new.  Right now, at the mall where I work, I'm going through our vacant spaces to make sure pipes aren't going to freeze.  There are OVER A HUNDRED VACANTS.   :O  And some are pretty good-sized.  Anchor store size.

The economy's been slowing down, so obviously, some retail space is going to go empty for a while. 
Title: Re: The problem with big box..architecture, not business.
Post by: Scout26 on January 02, 2009, 02:04:14 PM
How about Bulldoze 'em and turn it back into farmland ??
Title: Re: The problem with big box..architecture, not business.
Post by: Tallpine on January 02, 2009, 04:30:42 PM
How about Bulldoze 'em and turn it back into farmland ??

Or just plow up the parking lots ?   =|

Save the buildings for parking equipment, storing hay out of the weather, or maybe for indoor riding arenas :)
Title: Re: The problem with big box..architecture, not business.
Post by: Headless Thompson Gunner on January 02, 2009, 05:28:40 PM
And let's face it, ripping down a big box isn't that difficult.  Someone's always in the market for slabs of alumnimum, steel supports and decent ducting.  Concrete rumble is the only hitch, but you could use it for quasi clean fill.
Buying an abandoned big box store location and then tearing down the store often makes a lot of sense financially.  The value of a big retail center lies mostly in the location.  It's determined by things like the amount of traffic, accessibility, visibility, frontage and whatnot.  The improvements (buildings, parking lots, etc) don't contribute nearly as much to the value of the property as the location does.  The cost of putting up a big new retail building is pretty cheap relative to the cost of the location.
 
Title: Re: The problem with big box..architecture, not business.
Post by: BReilley on January 02, 2009, 06:25:20 PM
If we don't have sufficient stock of empty big-boxes, and blight, where on earth will the Zaibatsu's and the mercenaries hired by the front company for a rouge AI of our dystopian near-future hold their gun battles, secret labs, or the quasi-feral techno sub-cultures find tribal space?

Okay... I read too much William Gibson for my own good.  :lol:

*pictures the duel from Johnny Mnemonic occurring under the suspended ceiling in the old Costco*

Seriously though, one of the Costcos here in the Phoenix east valley just "moved".  They built a facility about half again as big, with:
- Worse freeway access.  If you approach from the east, you must either exit 1mi before the road Costco is on, or 1mi after.
- Worse parking situation.  Two ways into the lot, fewer shopping-cart corrals, parking slots arranged without particular pattern.
- And much, much more.  Well, not really, but two bullet points doesn't look right on its own.

Meanwhile, the old, perfectly functional building - with good parking, freeway access and location(2.5mi nearer to the city from the new one) - sits unused and will for a LONG time.  There just aren't many businesses that can make use of a warehouse-type building that large.  Maybe a hub for a tire retailer or some such, but most of them are in Phoenix proper, not way out in the east valley.

Anyway.  Some things just aren't meant to be understood.
Title: Re: The problem with big box..architecture, not business.
Post by: AJ Dual on January 02, 2009, 07:01:37 PM
*pictures the duel from Johnny Mnemonic occurring under the suspended ceiling in the old Costco*


Yes, the Lo-Teks fashioning their duel armor from the plastic of abandoned 5 gallon "family size" Vlasic pickle vats and, remnants of economy-size packaging of Stella-Doro biscoti.  It is rumored some of the tribal elders are the original employees of the store, when it closed, they could find no other place in society, so in the empty retail shell they remained... =D
Title: Re: The problem with big box..architecture, not business.
Post by: Strings on January 02, 2009, 07:31:52 PM
AJ, ole son, you need a life...
Title: Re: The problem with big box..architecture, not business.
Post by: AJ Dual on January 02, 2009, 08:03:28 PM
AJ, ole son, you need a life...

You know I have these four, right?

(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi156.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Ft33%2FAJ_Dual%2FDSCF6941.jpg&hash=d5e6f2bed9af07bcdf5eb52834a1bf1aa2510e99)

And Mrs. Dual works nights and weekends...

So, by definition, I have no life.
Title: Re: The problem with big box..architecture, not business.
Post by: Strings on January 02, 2009, 11:25:18 PM
ok, it's not a life you need... it's duct tape...
Title: Re: The problem with big box..architecture, not business.
Post by: ilbob on January 02, 2009, 11:45:09 PM
Yeah, that's another nasty tactic of the big box merchants. Never mind the problems an empty box creates, they'll pay good money to keep it empty. Wal-Mart did that for several years when a K-Mart near one of their stores here closed. Wal-Mart picked up the lease and refused to allow anything remotely in competition take over the space. They ultimately allowed Lowe's to raze the entire center and build a new Lowe's super home center -- which was much needed as a counterbalance to the wild proliferation of Home Depot stores around here.
I guess I don't see that as especially evil. No different than any other property owner refusing to sell his/her property for their own reasons.

I can't imagine what bad things an empty stor like that can bring. They are still paying property taxes, but consuming no services.
Title: Re: The problem with big box..architecture, not business.
Post by: Hawkmoon on January 02, 2009, 11:57:40 PM
I guess I don't see that as especially evil. No different than any other property owner refusing to sell his/her property for their own reasons.

I can't imagine what bad things an empty stor like that can bring. They are still paying property taxes, but consuming no services.

If it's just one store, off by itself, all it does is attract vagrants and vandals. The problem is much exacerbated when the box is (was) the anchor store in a small or medium strip center, because the smaller stores rely on the traffic generated by the big box for their customers. When Wal-Mart keeps the anchor store empty, the rest of the center slowly withers on the vine. (Or ... maybe not so slowly.)
Title: Re: The problem with big box..architecture, not business.
Post by: mfree on January 03, 2009, 11:04:14 AM
*ponder*

Wonder if any companies allow the short-term cheap rental of these abandoned facilities to people who need space for whatever reason for a few months, like storage while renovating or even something like garage space...
Title: Re: The problem with big box..architecture, not business.
Post by: Perd Hapley on January 03, 2009, 12:06:54 PM
If it's just one store, off by itself, all it does is attract vagrants and vandals. The problem is much exacerbated when the box is (was) the anchor store in a small or medium strip center, because the smaller stores rely on the traffic generated by the big box for their customers. When Wal-Mart keeps the anchor store empty, the rest of the center slowly withers on the vine. (Or ... maybe not so slowly.)

And those problems don't happen with large warehouses or other large buildings that go vacant?  Like that Grim Hotel that Savalas linked to earlier? 
Title: Re: The problem with big box..architecture, not business.
Post by: AJ Dual on January 03, 2009, 12:31:34 PM
And those problems don't happen with large warehouses or other large buildings that go vacant?  Like that Grim Hotel that Savalas linked to earlier? 

It depends.

Warehouses etc. are usually in a warehouse/manufacturing district. That only relies on the services, infrastructure, taxes/regulatory climate, quality of the workforce, and the rent/lease or mortgage value if it's worth it to surrounding properties. The "health" of the area does not rely on the perceptions of the public at large. It's also harder (for awhile at least) for the public to notice if a warehouse or factory is defunct.

Conditions generally need to be pretty bad for a business that does not deal with the public directly to pull up stakes and leave. They can do things like fence in the workers parking lot, add security etc. They have latitude to employ coping mechanisms, things that would make retail space look even worse.

As far as the Grim Hotel in Texarkana, was it the start of blight, or was it a victim of it?
Title: Re: The problem with big box..architecture, not business.
Post by: Zardozimo Oprah Bannedalas on January 03, 2009, 02:00:53 PM
Can't quite say. I think it came into being around the start of the Great Depression, which probably had an impact. Think it shut down the hotel part in the 50s, and was just a gift shop for the next few years.
Title: Re: The problem with big box..architecture, not business.
Post by: Perd Hapley on January 03, 2009, 06:55:40 PM
AJ,

Quote
warehouses or other large buildings

Such as those already mentioned.  The hotel, Wal-Marts abandoned after a Supercenter has moved in, malls that are mostly empty, etc.  I recall seeing some vacant buildings smack in the middle of Saint Louis, not out in the warehouse/industrial districts. 
Title: Re: The problem with big box..architecture, not business.
Post by: Manedwolf on January 03, 2009, 07:07:06 PM
*ponder*

Wonder if any companies allow the short-term cheap rental of these abandoned facilities to people who need space for whatever reason for a few months, like storage while renovating or even something like garage space...

Security, liability, slip and fall, drug dealing operations. Probably not.
Title: Re: The problem with big box..architecture, not business.
Post by: French G. on January 03, 2009, 11:24:38 PM
By the next recession I hope to have enough cash to stick an indoor go-kart track, gym, and anything else I can find and fit into a dead big box.
Title: Re: The problem with big box..architecture, not business.
Post by: Hawkmoon on January 04, 2009, 12:58:25 AM
And those problems don't happen with large warehouses or other large buildings that go vacant?  Like that Grim Hotel that Savalas linked to earlier? 

Of course it happens. Which is why it's NOT a good thing for buildings to be kept vacant. The issue raised here is that Wal-Mart locks up the lease so that prospective tenants, who would make the building NOT vacant, can't rent the space because Wally World has it under contract ... thus maintaining the undesireable vacant condition that's good for nobody other than Wal-Mart.

Yes, short term rents of such buildings do happen (unless Wal-Mart has it locked in). I have even seen a vacant former K-Mart rented out for one weekend, for a computer fair. To the owner/developer (or bank), and income is better than no income.
Title: Re: The problem with big box..architecture, not business.
Post by: Headless Thompson Gunner on January 04, 2009, 01:01:12 AM
thus maintaining the undesireable vacant condition that's good for nobody other than Wal-Mart.
The condition is also good for the landlord, not just Wally Mart or whoever is tying the place up.  The landlord gets regular lease payments without having to go through the hassle of re-leasing his property, and he has very low expenses because the property isn't actually being used.
Title: Re: The problem with big box..architecture, not business.
Post by: Perd Hapley on January 04, 2009, 03:17:25 AM
The issue raised here is that Wal-Mart locks up the lease

Actually, neither Wal-Mart nor "locking up the lease" were the subject of the original post.