Elf Sternberg

When it comes to retail (and light office-industrial) space, developers and owner/managers seem driven by the "old-and-busted vs. new-hotness" equation - the idea that "business" will flee older properties in order to fill up the dazzling new centers.

One part of the problem is that those older properties WERE the new hotness recently enough to retain full functionality (which is why the 'dazzle' of the new is layed on so thick & played up so forcefully.

Another part of the problem is that rents soar at the new places...but do not fall in the older centers (strips or otherwise); at the same time, fewer resource dollars are allocated to maintenance, clean-up & security at the older places (hey, they're *supposed* to be less desirable, so who cares if they run down?). This puts additional financial pressure on businesses that are *already* small, and have no deep-pockets to carry them through the deterioration of their business habitat. This leads to a situation (starts slow, but ramps up) where "small-business" sees their costs driven up and their traffic driven down - and leases where summary vacation is the only recourse (and I don't mean a week at the beach).

The capper is that tax laws allow the owners/managers of these retail strips/zones/malls/etc to deduct the lost rent on spaces they can't lease from their taxes: This means that eeven the least efficient management of even the least-desirable properties to charge whatever they want - no matter how unreasonable - for empty space...because even though they CAN'T get it from the businesses they're "catering to", they WILL get it as a reduction in taxable income.

The big loser here - as always (this has been going on for DECADES) - is small business, the people with a product, a service, an angle who can't set up shop and go into that business...because only a fool would charge them rents they can actually afford.

The dynamic works the same w/ the big-box stores, too - but they DO have deep pockets - and political clout unmatched by the small, independent business-person - so their "consequences" from all this are simply passed on to the consumer...and business continues as usual.

I live in Atlanta - a big place (75 miles from end to end) - and there is almost as much empty / abandoned space here as there is tenanted space. Much of it is simply uninhabitable, either due to the deterioration of the space/context itself - or due to the deterioration of the area around it (and corresponding loss of traffic, access and basic services).

I think it would be a great stimulus to the economy simply to motivate landlords to adjust their rents to what people can pay.

'Course, NOT destroying natural communities & commercial areas - and NOT replacing them with huge commercial warrens anchored by big-boxes and topped w/ bling - would be good, too.