Reply to More profitable for DC landlords to "sit" on empty storefronts than rent at market rate??

Forum Index » Metropolitan DC Local Politics

Reply to "More profitable for DC landlords to "sit" on empty storefronts than rent at market rate??"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote]

Anonymous wrote:
Keep in mind that renting to banks and WaWas are not necessarily in the LL's best interest either with new projects where you are trying to choose retail tenants who will be an amenity to the tenants. That's why new multi-family developments (think Park Van Ness on Conn., or City Ridge and the Wegman's) generally have better retail---at least at the beginning when they are trying to attract residential tenants to the apartments. But the blocks of small 1920ish commercial? Those are usually family-owned, with no debt, and usually no one owner owns all the lots in the block so redevelopment is unlikely, even if such properties weren't already subject to historic designations, which many are. Those owners are going after the highest rent they can get.

This makes sense, but I feel like there was this approach in Columbia Heights and now all the retail is gone. I am worried about pegging density to vibrant retail and dining. Without some planning and tax codes to guide it, I think you eventually end up with wawa, banks and empty storefronts. The city needs to look at this, city wide instead of thinking density will "solve" everything.
[/quote]

This phenomenon happened in Columbia Heights because there is not a critical mass of higher income residents to support the type of retail you seem to want.  There are a lot of low income people in Columbia Heights living in public/Section 8 housing.  There are a lot more of those buildings than there are market-rate/upper income apartments.   And the owners of building at the metro who spiked Pete's to get WaWa were just greedy, but they were also trying to improve the income of their building at the time, since they had a lot of competition from new buildings on U Street.  Where Columbia Heights DID get good neighborhood serving retail was the 11th Street corridor.   Compare Columbia Heights to the U Street corridor where almost all of the multi-family is market rate.  It is just super hard for retailers (whether higher end or lower end) to succeed if there is not enough of a single income demographic.  So that's why Best Buy, ChicFila, Krispy Kreme and Target survive at Columbia Heights---they draw from a wide  range of incomes.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics