Large store format

[veteran+]

https://www.supermarketnews.com/retail- ... york-store

Interesting how Wegmans can open a large store in NYC and no one will do the same in my area.

[storewanderer]

https://www.supermarketnews.com/retail- ... york-store

Interesting how Wegmans can open a large store in NYC and no one will do the same in my area.

NYC has allowed large format stores for years. They don't actively fight them or discourage them. They let the stores open if the stores can figure out a way to piece together the space to open a large store. This is how they got large but multi level Kmarts in the 90's and over the year multiple other large retailers and now this continues with Wegmans. Multiple operators there are doing large format stores- Kmart did it, Target does it, Wegmans does it, Wal Mart has, Whole Foods has (well they tried a large format in San Francisco but now that store is now closed), Fareway did/does (whoever owns the name now), Wegmans does... so in NYC you have to do large format because if you don't, multiple competitors will. In CA that is not the case.

They can open these large stores around transit hubs in NYC and there are plenty of people around to support them and people appreciate the stores being there. The very strong transit situation there helps move customers and employees to and from the stores effectively. In more car centric CA the transit system does not do as good of a job (it comes very close in San Francisco but still not as good).

The operators in CA do not need to do a lot of large format stores because they as a collective group have decided it isn't worth their time. Why should they go to all of the time and expense to build large format stores, in a place like CA where literally everyone will fight the development for 100 different reasons (traffic, environmental impact, type of materials being used in building, the list goes on and on)? It would take so many years to get any large format store approved in any major metro (look how long that Ikea in San Francisco is taking which is delayed AGAIN and isn't opening this year, and that is moving into an existing building)...

Had Target not gotten on the small store kick they got on, I think they would have figured out a way to develop some additional larger format stores in the larger metros in CA but they took the easy route and instead just started to do 30k square foot joke stores instead because they knew they could get those approved easier and faster and since there was no competitor treating the customer to a better large format store, it really didn't matter that their little 30k square foot store is very lacking and substandard compared to the large format they could have done on different nearby real estate.

[buckguy]

https://www.supermarketnews.com/retail- ... york-store

Interesting how Wegmans can open a large store in NYC and no one will do the same in my area.

Lower Manhattan has lots of spaces for large stores. The old “Ladies Mile” area has Whole Foods and lots of big box chains in what once were department stores. REI a took over a large chunk of the Puck Building which used to house publishing and academic uses. Wegmans is taking only about half of the ground floor of the old Wanamaker store which was later Kmart. The purpose built large retail tends to be in places like East Harlem (Costco and the departed Pathmark) that are more speculative and have old industrial or other large spaces to recycle. LA a seems to have relatively few places like this to recycle outside of the Harbor Freeway corridor,

[storewanderer]

https://www.supermarketnews.com/retail- ... york-store

Interesting how Wegmans can open a large store in NYC and no one will do the same in my area.

Lower Manhattan has lots of spaces for large stores. The old “Ladies Mile” area has Whole Foods and lots of big box chains in what once were department stores. REI a took over a large chunk of the Puck Building which used to house publishing and academic uses. Wegmans is taking only about half of the ground floor of the old Wanamaker store which was later Kmart. The purpose built large retail tends to be in places like East Harlem (Costco and the departed Pathmark) that are more speculative and have old industrial or other large spaces to recycle. LA a seems to have relatively few places like this to recycle outside of the Harbor Freeway corridor,

If it was a competitive necessity, a few retailers would figure out how to do it in Los Angeles.

All that anti-Wal Mart sentiment in California has also really helped to doom big stores in general, not just Wal Marts, really any non union big store that sells food. Because the tactics employed to keep Wal Marts from being able to be easily built have also been used to keep out various other big stores as well.

Up in OR/WA around Portland and Seattle Fred Meyer has plenty of big stores. So does Costco. So does Target. Wal Mart... well they closed the two big Portland units and I don't think they ever got into Seattle. They all did what they had to in order to get big stores. Since Fred Meyer was in the market doing it, it was a competitive necessity.

[BillyGr]

Lower Manhattan has lots of spaces for large stores. The old “Ladies Mile” area has Whole Foods and lots of big box chains in what once were department stores. REI a took over a large chunk of the Puck Building which used to house publishing and academic uses. Wegmans is taking only about half of the ground floor of the old Wanamaker store which was later Kmart.

Actually, it says two levels (ground floor and below - aka basement).

But, the point is that it's still not easy to build such a large store completely new, which is why they tend to take over spots that have been stores previously (or like that one you mention, other uses), vs. trying to take down many older buildings to build a totally new store space as they would elsewhere.

[buckguy]

https://www.supermarketnews.com/retail- ... york-store

Interesting how Wegmans can open a large store in NYC and no one will do the same in my area.

Lower Manhattan has lots of spaces for large stores. The old “Ladies Mile” area has Whole Foods and lots of big box chains in what once were department stores. REI a took over a large chunk of the Puck Building which used to house publishing and academic uses. Wegmans is taking only about half of the ground floor of the old Wanamaker store which was later Kmart. The purpose built large retail tends to be in places like East Harlem (Costco and the departed Pathmark) that are more speculative and have old industrial or other large spaces to recycle. LA a seems to have relatively few places like this to recycle outside of the Harbor Freeway corridor,

If it was a competitive necessity, a few retailers would figure out how to do it in Los Angeles.

All that anti-Wal Mart sentiment in California has also really helped to doom big stores in general, not just Wal Marts, really any non union big store that sells food. Because the tactics employed to keep Wal Marts from being able to be easily built have also been used to keep out various other big stores as well.

Up in OR/WA around Portland and Seattle Fred Meyer has plenty of big stores. So does Costco. So does Target. Wal Mart... well they closed the two big Portland units and I don't think they ever got into Seattle. They all did what they had to in order to get big stores. Since Fred Meyer was in the market doing it, it was a competitive necessity.

The LA area may have relatively small supermarkets and fewer opportunities for big box retail than perhaps some other places, but there's no shortage of Costcos, Home Depots, IKEAs, and even Walmarts. The density of Costcos in LA County is not unlike that in the DC area, where it is difficult to build and there almost no industrial property to recycle. Home Depot has some relatively small stores that they got from Hechinger in locations without other options, but still plenty of standard sized stores and Lowe's has built up a stock of purpose built stores.

I suspect that if chains thought they really needed bigger stores, they would find opportunities to build them. Stater Brothers seems to build somewhere around 45K sf even though they probably have more opportunities to go larger than if their core area was in LA County.

[veteran+]

I wish you guys could experience, first hand, the 5 mile radius around me for shopping.

There is major construction all over (large square foot projects). Some significant gentrification going on that was on hold during Covid. From what I can see with all the tear downs and also empty buildings (properties) waiting decisions, there are
many of these that could have been locations for really big (less than 100,000 sqft) supermarkets.

Miles in my area between stores is very different than other areas. The nearest Lowes to me is 4 miles away via congested surface streets with myriad stop lights. 4 miles might as well be 20 miles, time wise. There are no freeways or 4 lane surface streets to get around anywhere. Home Depot is 5 miles of traffic to a nasty area and nasty store. Costco is 7.5 miles ...........forgetta bout it. IKEA....................Burbank, driving over the hill to the Valley? Oh hell no!

My point is that there are parcels of land that could be large enough for a BIG supermarket but "they" choose not to do it. They are building things like multi-use projects, high end Hotels, etc.

The area is underserved in many categories (too far and too much traffic and who wants to go to "that" area anyway). The stores that are close enough are very run down (except the Pavilions $$). Many people do niche shopping (Ralphs, Trader Joes, Sprouts, Vons, Whole Foods, Bristol Farms, Pavilions, Albertsons (too far), Target and ethnic). Traffic says they do. But, I believe that's crazy. It would take the whole day driving, finding parking (not all free) and being equipped with coolers to keep fresh and frozen product safe. Bargain hunting? Time and gas gobbles up any savings.

Just sayin......................

[storewanderer]

My point is that there are parcels of land that could be large enough for a BIG supermarket but "they" choose not to do it. They are building things like multi-use projects, high end Hotels, etc.

The area is underserved in many categories (too far and too much traffic and who wants to go to "that" area anyway). The stores that are close enough are very run down (except the Pavilions $$). Many people do niche shopping (Ralphs, Trader Joes, Sprouts, Vons, Whole Foods, Bristol Farms, Pavilions, Albertsons (too far), Target and ethnic). Traffic says they do. But, I believe that's crazy. It would take the whole day driving, finding parking (not all free) and being equipped with coolers to keep fresh and frozen product safe. Bargain hunting? Time and gas gobbles up any savings.

Just sayin......................

Who do you blame for this? Do you call the blame on the developers or the blame on grocers who do not want to go into these spaces?

It almost sounds more like in the cases you describe the developers have determined they can make more money on other uses for the land so they go that route. At the same time, since there are not really interested grocers, and few grocers in the market in the first place (about to be fewer if this Kroger Albertsons merger goes), there is not a situation where the grocers are competing with one another for a prime space and the prime space going to the highest bidder (making the developer more money by giving the space to the highest bidding grocer). Instead it turns the tables so the grocer (the only one who fits the space) can dictate terms to the developer and it seems these developers rather than rolling over are just saying screw that, we will just put something else in the space that will make more money.

[veteran+]

I blame the retailers first, for their short sightedness.

I blame the developers and the City as well.

I also blame Walmart and their distructive buisness model that fueled "The Backlash" against large footprint stores.

[storewanderer]

I blame the retailers first, for their short sightedness.

I blame the developers and the City as well.

I also blame Walmart and their distructive buisness model that fueled "The Backlash" against large footprint stores.

It really is too bad. I think the main reason it isn't like this in OR/WA is because Fred Meyer was already there in the market and established with big stores. Costco also being from the market helped to some extent.

But the factors that make big stores work back east in NYC etc. are different plays. At buckguy noted redevelopment of industrial type spaces is a big thing. The way public transit is set up is a big thing too. It is just more dense.

At some point these dense groups who are being sardine packed into dense housing in CA and have lack of nearby adequate stores, parking issues, etc. are going to throw their arms up and move to places with easier access to businesses. A lot of these new developments are anti car but the public transit system to support anti car isn't there (except in San Francisco- and even there that public transit system has exorbitant pricing compared to similar systems in other US cities).