|
Should Cities Limit Chain Stores To Help Promote Small Business
Retail revolution: should cities ban chain stores?
20 April 2017 By Colin Horgan Read More: https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2...stores-toronto Quote:
Chain stores in New York, where some activists are proposing ‘formula retail’ be limited to preserve the character of different neighbourhoods. Photograph: Getty http://i.imgur.com/bmXuJdT.jpg?1 ‘Dominated by multistorey facades of bright corporate advertising’ … Yonge Street in Toronto, Canada. Photograph: Alamy http://i.imgur.com/XYdeWD2.jpg?1 Graffiti in Stokes Croft, Bristol, where a riot broke out in 2011 after police engaged with protesters against the opening of the city’s 32nd Tesco branch. Photograph: Sam Frost http://i.imgur.com/GduNoMq.jpg?1 Vesuvio cafe in San Francisco, where some neighbourhoods strictly limit chain stores. Photograph: Alamy http://i.imgur.com/C9rMQlX.jpg?1 |
Well, since I live in one of the cities mentioned that does limit formula retail, I can say it has good points and bad points. It does what it is supposed to do which is allow the flourishing of mom/pop (more often 2 twenty-somethings) boutique retail but it also puts a lot of stress on Amazon delivery people. Since we have no Way-Mart and or other "big box" stores (2 exceptions: a single CostCo and a single Lowes), I buy an awful lot of staples and non-perishable items from Amazon and Walmart.com at sometimes half the local prices.
I actually live near Hayes Valley which was mentioned in the article but I don't shop there. I go there fairly often to eat--lots of restaurants that I suspect might be there anyway--but since I am not a shoe fetishist, there's not a lot in the stores there I want to buy (or want to pay the prices they ask). My bottom line is that I am OK with this policy on individual streets in certain high end neighborhoods only, but the city as a whole should allow the sort of discount shopping venues most Americans take for granted and that provide the less affluent with all sorts of inexpensive goods. The lack of such places in San Francisco is one more reason nobody but the rich can afford to live here. Hayes St. http://www.sanfranciscodays.com/phot...ouse-hayes.jpg https://images.search.yahoo.com/sear...g&action=click PS: San Francisco does have its district of high end retail like Chicago's Miracle Mile, New York's 5th and Madison Aves and, I presume, Yonge St. It's around and near Union Square--here you find 5 or 6 major department stores, Cartier, Tiffany, Van Cleef, Apple, Nike, and Prada and numerous other designer shops. No big box style discount though. Target did recently open a "City Target" which has limited offerings. |
Interesting question. There's obviously some very difficult issues when it comes to neighborhood renewal and pricing local business out of the market. In this case though with escalating rents the only stores that could survive are speciality luxury stores with huge mark up and profit on a few products. This case shows how neighborhood livability suffers. While we might think the old building is an eyesoar it is really an important part of the makeup in a healthy urban environment.
I like to think of it like the backyard. Sure, you don't like the ugly piece of rotting fence in the backyard, but that is hosting bugs that make your soil healthier for your flowers and habitats for small birds that eat annoying mosquitos. All in all, a little bit of eyesore is potentially making your backyard more liveable. There is certainly something I like about non-chain stores. It means that when I visit a city I get a feel for that city instead of the same stuff I could see anywhere. For me familiarity generally breeds contempt. While I sometimes just want something familiar, when all the options are familiar I am bored. The balance is what is important. |
Formula retail doesn't have to have much to do with old buildings. Outfits like Walgreen's and CVS are adept at putting locations in historic buildings (after renovation) and so are fast food outfits. Even Home Depot has some impressive retrofits in downtown areas. So allowing formula retail doesn't mean you bulldoze the site and put up a cheap modern structure necessarily--that can be controlled by other methods.
As for rents, the general argument is the formula folks can afford higher rents than one-of-a-kinds, even higher end one-of-a-kinds. It's the fact that they can afford such rents and their willingness to pay them drives up overall rents to levels one-of-a-kinds can't afford that is the justification for a legal ban. |
Perhaps the streetfronts of the touristy and historical streets can maintain the unique shops, and have space for chain stores on other streets.
|
Store size and chain vs. non-chain are separate topics, though they can influence each other.
Seattle has examples where favoritism works. Laws about putting calories on menus, setting work schedules weeks in advance, and minimum wages are all different depending on the employee count or the number of locations. We've never been as chain-dominated as some cities, but these have helped solidify this fact. Also I'm a couple blocks from the Pike Place Market, which is run by a public PDA...the only chains are the ones that started there including Starbucks and Sur La Table. Even having two locations is rare...I'm thinking Beecher's. |
no, that would be stupid. riding on the coat tails of gentrifcation and white guilt, now we apparently are entering a era of retail guilt as well. feeling bad about being too successful. leave it to san francisco to try such a thing. cities should not engage in social engineering to further their local agendas. but that's the problem with far left city government, they think they know what is best for their citizens. don't get me started on soda tax.....cbd's are for business and tourists, many of whom are foreign and probably are attracted to big box america retail. neighborhoods are for locals and mom and pops flourish better in those environments anyway. city commerce should grow organically in response to the free market...rent too high? open up elsewhere. that's the way its always been. already expensive cities trying to mitigate high expenses are a day late, and many hundreds of nimby dollars short....
|
No. Let consumers decide what and where they want to shop.
|
No, just build enough retail space so lower margin businesses can afford rent.
|
Isn't brick-and-mortar retail disappearing anyway?
I know, just playing devil's advocate. I got into a brief conversation with someone regarding this; those spur-of-the-moment, suddenly needed purchases can't be handled by ordering something online: "I need a new tie for my cousin's wedding in 3 hours! F*UCK!" So of course you're gonna run into a store to buy a necktie, you're not gonna order it online. |
The City of Toronto has no power to ban chain stores. Do other cities have that power and how is it accomplished?
|
Just like how there's heritage buildings perhaps a process can be set up to decide whether a neighbourhood should be preserved, or a particular street.
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
Does it still count if a local business becomes a chain? Asheville is home to a few restaurants that, like kudzu, are beginning to creep across the South, sinking deep roots into cities and towns everywhere in the area. Tupelo Honey, an upscale Southern restaurant on College Street downtown, has opened fourteen other branches. Likewise, Chai Pani, an Indian place on Battery Park Avenue, has colonized Atlanta. Papa's and Beer, the (not "a," the) Mexican place is on pace to take over the Carolinas and Tennessee from their flagship palace of flavor in Hendersonville.
|
Quote:
Formula retail is defined as a store having: Quote:
Doesn't matter where the first store was. Once they hit 11 they are subject to the ordinance. The existing locations can stay but new ones have to comply which can mean they are prohibited. |
Note that the most unfortunate and perverse aspect of this policy can be blight. In most cities there are well-known "difficult" (sometimes called "unlucky") retail locations where multiple stores have failed. These locations become hard to fill. San Francisco has some and in some cases national chains, realizing more competitive spots might be hard for them to occupy, have chosen these unwanted spaces. In more than one case, they have still been turned down and a retail space that may have been vacant for years remains vacant.
|
Portland had a notorious case recently where a trader joe's wanted to move into north porltand. Neighborhood activists tried to cock block it on the grounds that it was only catering to high income households and that poor, long time locals were being left out (ie trader joes contributes to gentrification because of its average clientele). But have you seen tj prices?? The neighborhood group wanted the city to try and promote a strip mall that would have local business go in, instead. well its still empty, and the proposed anchor tenant (natural grocers??) hasn't started building yet. the city also sold the property for about 2million dollars below market value.....that's weird....
|
Quote:
Maybe it should be combined with historical preservation, to ensure that developers do not simply buy out three storefronts with 16-foot frontages, demolish them, and make a new more chain-friendly retail space. But that's about it. |
I'd like to see more multi-story retail here like they have in Japan which gives lower margin businesses more affordable spaces to operate in highly desirable commercial corridors.
|
Quote:
|
Chicago already let Walmart into the city years ago, even if the majority of their locations are focused primarily on groceries rather than full sized stores; Target's presence increases every year, especially when it comes to their smaller neighborhood focused stores; Walgreens has covered the Loop with so many locations that you can quite literally stand in one and see another; and Amazon rolled out its same day delivery and pickup service awhile ago, so no, I don't think this would work in Chicago. We crossed the Rubicon awhile ago.
That being said, some of them have been able to take advantage of historic buildings. Here's the Target on State St in the Loop: https://www.google.com/maps/place/Ta...275442!6m1!1e1 Walgreens in Wicker Park: https://www.google.com/maps/place/Wa...677768!6m1!1e1 |
Quote:
I.e. I open 11 branches of Jonesy's All English Steak & Kidney Pie shops owned by me through Jonesycorp Inc. Then when I want to open the 12th I use identical branding and menu but it's owned by Jonesycorp2 Inc. :dunno: |
Quote:
No. That's what franchises do. There may be a million McDonalds in the world but only 100,000 franchisees. But McDonalds is McDonalds. However, the reverse is not true. One owner can have as many DIFFERENT restaurants as he wants and not be "formula" as long as each one is a bit different and unique--employees dressed differently, different color scheme (purple arches, not golden), different branding. |
Perhaps Formula Retail could make exceptions for cheap places like fast food, dollar stores, etc. but keep high end department type stores out if they have more than 11 stores.
|
Sometimes the equation allows X number of stores within the city or state...department stores would typically be ok.
In my area, franchises get counted as part of the chain regarding wage laws etc. |
I think the crux is more with how things are developed and structured. It's more lucrative to combine a bunch of small lots and build an imposing, large structure that is totally out of scale, which will demand larger retail spaces in many cases. Cities in North America (and maybe elsewhere, I'm not sure) need to re-emphasize fine-grained, human-scaled streetscapes. Those spaces which are less lucrative to a DSW or Whole Foods. Not that larger scale retailers don't have their place, but honestly, how many Shoppers Drug Marts do we need?
But that only solves part of the issue. The other issue is that newer developments tend to seek higher rents and they tend to only lease out to more secure (ie chain) tenants. Banks are very popular in these situations as they are very secure, and likely to stay put for decades. It's partly for this reason that Jane Jacobs advocated for old commercial buildings and I think part of the solution is to preserve those buildings better where applicable (we don't need a museum city) while incentivizing fine-grained retail and giving loans to new entrepreneurs in new retail spaces. |
Quote:
The patio and even sign adds character to this tourist spot. I don't care how unique they try and make this flagship Shoppers, it won't be as interesting as what's there now. Then again, Hard Rock is a chain too. The SF regulations are interesting but not sure how it would play out in real life. Would it have meant that this Hard Rock cafe never came into being? This will be a Shoppers Drug Mart http://www.eraarch.ca/wp/wp-content/...58-800x600.jpg Courtesy of eraarch There's already a Shoppers on the other side of the square (and one across the street in the Eaton Centre) http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-fa5U3BkYcc...867-744586.jpg Courtesy of bp |
The Cheesecake Factory should move there instead.
|
Quote:
Anyway, I think there are good arguments for banning certain stores from a historic preservation standpoint or retaining local character (so that a harborfront remains fish shops and not banks, for instance), but it's not viable at a citywide level. |
Quote:
|
I have mixed feelings about this. Austin (my home town) has "Keep Austin Weird" to help promote local businesses, and I was a huge supporter of that in the way that I chose to shop when I still lived there. Did I shop at Walmart, Target, HEB (large grocery chain in Texas), etc.? You bet. Their prices and convenience couldn't be beat sometimes...but where I ate, drank coffee, paid for services for my car, home repair, etc....these were predominantly local. What I've found is that most folks will do what is best for their wallet in spite of their desire to support mom&pop establishments. Free market, for that reason, is a blessing and a curse. However, we do well to remember that Walmart was once a small, local, family-owned store in NW Arkansas.
I personally think having guidelines for architecture and size of establishments is better than saying who can come in and who can't. |
Quote:
|
Generally, I don't think cities should place this kind of artificial barrier on business. However, I do think they should (more) strictly enforce land use policies and not give in (as much) when chain stores demand that they need things a certain way to do business. Things like grocery stores demanding acres of parking.
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Soon, though, it will be a drone (drone car or flying drone I'm not sure.). Who needs the guy? |
Seems like chain stores are really limiting themselves lately since so many of them are going out of business. That is certainly the case in the strip malls and enclosed malls around here. Maybe it is less prevalent in truly urban streetscapes, but I suspect that there will be a thinning out of chain store operations in those settings as well.
|
Doesn't Amazon already have one-hour delivery on many items in certain markets? I know you can get it in NYC (though I try to avoid Amazon whenever possible).
|
Quote:
|
As a Philadelphian, I find this topic amusing. With its 15 foot wide row houses and shallow 50 foot deep lots, Philly simply does not have the floor plans necessary to attract chain retailers outside of Center City. As a result, you can walk down two of our trendiest corridors -- Frankford Ave and East Passyunk -- and it's one interesting independent retailer after another with no national chains in sight. Starbucks does not exist north of Vine Street, despite there being a number of trendy neighborhoods. Every coffee shop in Fishtown, Northern Liberties, Fairmount and Brewerytown is locally based.
|
^^They'd be there if they wanted to be there and the lot sizes wouldn't stop them in any way. I can think of any number of narrow, deep buildings in SF that are Starbuck's or the local version, Peet's as well as many independents. It is also possible to combine buildings or even , if permitted, tear them down and combine lots and build new. But you seem to be saying there are no surface parking lots in these areas because those are most likely to become larger-format formula retail venues. They simply replace the surface parking with lower level parking and put their building above it.
However, many of these stores have demographic criteria as to where they want to put stores and sometimes those criteria don't seem to make a lot of sense to outsiders. |
Quote:
Whats happening to the flagship HMV. I went a few weeks ago to try and use some old gift cards I had found, and they wouldnt take them. |
Quote:
|
| All times are GMT. The time now is 5:41 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.