The New Retail Thread

CVS/Pharmacy is coming to 285 Columbus Ave, street level of condominium building at the corners of Columbus Ave and Clarendon Street, across the street from proposed Columbus Center project.
 
sweet, dont have enough cvs stores around!
 
Well, it's not much, but after Z-Square closed I figured the little cafe in P.O. Square was going to be shuttered for a while, but there is a sign up now announcing a new place called 'Sips' that is set to open in April.

So, yay?
 
Dish restaurant on Shawmut Ave in the South End is no more. A proposed rent increase sent the tenant on a vacation a couple weeks ago; vacation now permanent.
 
I wonder what costs are going up that necessitates a rate increase? 'Cuz lord knows they aren't reacting to a spike in demand or contraction in supply.
 
The greedy landlords will wake up soon. City governments should make it a policy to encourage lending to small businesses looking to set up shop in these spaces, and prompt landlords to take them.
 
A CRA for rentals would lead to the same results as it did for home buyers. The heart is in the right place, the results have unintended consequences.
 
I've seen certain storefronts in Boston empty for years. Can someone explain how it is economically possible for landlords to leave retail spaces unoccupied for such prolonged periods of time? You would think at some point simple economics would force them to practically give a space away to a tenant.
 
They might not need the money, and they might feel the image of their building is overall better preserved by the illusion that the space might someday lease to a high-end client than that it is actually being leased by a lower-end one.
 
According to Northeastern's newspaper (The Huntington News), there will be a Jamba Juice and Peet's Coffee at Parcel 18--the newest dorm @ Northeastern. I don't know about you guys, but I LOVE Jamba Juice!
 
I've seen certain storefronts in Boston empty for years. Can someone explain how it is economically possible for landlords to leave retail spaces unoccupied for such prolonged periods of time? You would think at some point simple economics would force them to practically give a space away to a tenant.

People like the Levin family, Druker, etc. sit on buildings to speculate on sales or group lots together for future development. They aren't in the business of being active land lords and don't want the responsibility of managing tenants. As long as years down the line they've made money on the sale or redevelopment of the property they don't care.

If the city was smart they'd figure out a tax scheme which compels commercial land lords to find tenants based on the lost revenue to the city from not having an occupying business paying taxes. Forcing those who buy properties to actually make sure they are used for their zoned occupancy rather than sitting derelict makes sense. However, I do see the legal and ethical issues with doing so and the unintended consequences of making it far more difficult to buy really run down properties over time for massive redevelopment. In the later case developers would be forced to rehabilitate buildings, often pursuing changes in occupancy, in the years prior to demolishing those buildings for the long term intended development
 
Couldn't an incentive be achieved with a more micromanaged regulatory structure, rather than a blanket law?
 
Erm, in theory the BRA (micromanaged regulatory structure) is supposed to make sure all neighborhoods are operating at their highest and best uses, yet we see how well that has worked.

The state really can't get involved in providing funding for keeping up the appearance or subsidizing tenants for derelict spaces created by large property owners. If the money was available more landlords would gleefully engage in crappy ownership on the taxpayers' dime. Any legislation which targets absenteeism needs to stick the expenses to the owners.

BIDs and neighborhood groups usually help with this sort of thing assuming they are given enough teeth. Arbitration also must be available to prevent competing owners and businesses from ganging up on competition they want to squash. Otherwise you'd have long standing owners, businesses, and large corporations using shells exploiting BIDs as a bully pulpit to racket any upstarts into the ground.

Market forces work well with small property owners to get on the ball in leasing space or attempting to find some immediately profitable use. Really large companies and land owners usually have deep enough money to burn, or enough of a monopoly, to ignore them for very long periods of time if it means an eventual large payoff.

A small property owner is going to want the rent over a decade to pay for other things before getting a large payoff during a sale. A large company or owner often sees collecting rent and dealing with tenants too much of pain and they are perfectly content to wait for the payoff.

That's a big reason why neighborhood groups get miffed when one company buys up several small lots. Usually the lots are left to rot for years until a big sale or mega development goes up. SCL, the Gaiety Theater, etc. are examples of this.
 
Someone suggested an Old Retail Thread. Perhaps that would be more fitting. :(
Boston Globe - March 31, 2009
Homeless book peddler confronts tangled epilogue in Harvard Square

By Bella English, Globe Staff | March 31, 2009

Larry Millman was browsing at one of his favorite places in Cambridge and ended up with a handful of used books, including "Lingua ex Machina: Reconciling Darwin and Chomsky with the Human Brain."

"A little light reading for the bathroom," he quipped as he forked over $5 for the book and a couple of others. Millman, an author, is a steady customer at Almost Banned in Harvard Square Booksellers, a sidewalk bookstall run by a homeless man.

But the Massachusetts Avenue stand is closing today, and with it goes one more quirky piece of Harvard Square. Ken O'Brien, who has sold or given away tens of thousands of books since opening nearly three years ago, is giving away the last of his stash.

O'Brien, the first and only homeless person to belong to the Harvard Square Business Association, said he is tired of fighting City Hall.

His story is a long, involved one that includes getting arrested twice, obtaining various permits, and being moved onto subway grates by the Cambridge superintendent of streets, only to have the MBTA say he couldn't set up on its property. When he tried to open a book business in a nearby church, he found he couldn't get liability insurance. When he tried to get a tax identification number, he said, "they wanted all sorts of paperwork" that he couldn't provide, especially since he had a half-dozen other homeless people working for him on commission. Now his peddler's permit has lapsed, and he said he has grown weary of filling out forms.

"It's the paperwork that killed me," O'Brien said. Decades of living on the streets have weathered his face beyond his 55 years. He says he ran a similar business in New York and was never hassled.

The city of Cambridge says it has been working with O'Brien and that the only problem now is that he hasn't applied for a new permit.

O'Brien, who grew up a few blocks away from his bookstall, stuck his thumb out at age 17 and spent the next 35 years riding the roads and rails around the country. "I came home to retire," he said, "and the books would have been my retirement."

His books came from several sources, most notably a place in Rhode Island that would deliver 1,000-pound boxes of books to him for free. O'Brien sold the books for $2 each, putting the excess in a storage unit he rented. But each winter, when it became too cold to work outside, he started giving the books away - "hoping that people would remember me in the spring." In the winter, he'd get by on what he'd saved, with occasional panhandling.

As he speaks, a woman in an sport utility vehicle pulls up to the curb and asks if he would like several bags of books. He thanks her and begins putting them on the shelves.

His family, as he calls it, consists of "Frenchie," or Earlene French, his longtime girlfriend; along with Charlie, an 11-year-old black and white cat; and Penny, a 6-year-old German short-haired pointer he rescued from a puppy mill. The animals, which sit or lie patiently atop the "mobile home" O'Brien fashioned for them, attract as much attention from passersby as the books. At night he drapes a tarp over the bookstall area, and the four of them share sleeping bags to keep warm.

O'Brien's legal problems began shortly after he set up shop in June 2006. After he was arrested, the Department of Public Works said he needed a sidewalk obstruction permit that would cost $1,000. O'Brien took it to court, and a judge ruled that he needed only a peddler's permit. But when he went back to his bookselling, he was arrested again.

That's when a judge appointed Cambridge lawyer Daniel Beck to take his case. Beck recalls that city officials were using an antiquated law against O'Brien. Because he was selling only books - printed matter protected by the First Amendment - District Court Judge Severlin Singleton III deemed it a constitutionally protected activity. "They found this obscure law about peddlers with which to charge him," he said. "It's the first, last, and only time I've ever seen it used."

O'Brien says he then helped draft the first peddler's permit in Cambridge in decades. Superintendent of Streets William Dwyer inspected his spot, in front of J. August Co. clothing store, drew a map, and assigned O'Brien a few yards down, on the MBTA grates. When the city finally gave him a business certificate, it was good only for a few months - not the four years allowed by the state, says O'Brien. Then the MBTA told him to move.

But Cambridge City Solicitor Donald Drisdell says the city tried to work with O'Brien after the court ruling. The ordinance barred peddlers from Harvard Square because the streets were narrow and congested at the time the law was written, Drisdell says. Though O'Brien obtained permits for 2006 and 2007, he refused to get one for 2008, Drisdell says. "Our position is that anyone who wants to set up on a sidewalk has to get a permit from the city and the city will work with them. . . . He has indicated his refusal to do that."

Though O'Brien and French had earned enough money from the books to rent an apartment last summer, they became homeless again in February when their hopes for expanding the business hit a snag.

The plan was to start several bookstands on wheels that would support 15 to 20 other homeless people.

In the square, the couple are known by other homeless adults and runaways as "Mom" and "Pop" because of their propensity to share an extra blanket, food, or a few bucks.

Though several customers expressed anger and sadness at his imminent departure, O'Brien doesn't want anyone feeling sorry for him.

He's got a plan. He'll apply for Social Security insurance, pitch a tent in a park for the spring and summer, then head for Arizona with his "family" in the fall. "We'll try to get some llamas, and we'll walk into the mountains," he said.

But their longtime customers are still dismayed.

"I come by here every day, and it redeems my visit to a part of Cambridge that is becoming increasingly colorless, faceless, and franchised," Millman said. "I think it's a terrible sign of the times and one less reason for me to visit Harvard Square."
 
...and, about the article, hopefully the city is absolutely embarassed by this and gives them some motivation to trim the different permits and policies down.
 

Back
Top