Malls Washed Up? Not Quite Yet: Ideas for Metro Atlanta (assessor, house)

[cwkimbro]

Income Changes in Metro Atlanta: Meandering... |

This has alot of good supporting maps that I can't take the time to post as images, but wanted to share.

I would pay some attention to the ones of family income change from 1970 to 2013 on slides 11 and 12 of the power point and look at the north dekalb area closely.

Slide 6 has a good map to look at for the metro area to examine where wealth is today.

[bryantm3]

cwkimbro, i actually think we agree on this, we're just coming at it from two different angles. you are right about the areas in gwinnett, where the population has aged and has fewer children than at one time. the same is true around north dekalb mall and northlake. however, if you get down to *why* those areas did not continue to attract young residents, the reason is that the area was all built around the same time in a low density sprawl format.

those neighbourhoods around these failing malls were built only to house young families, and no one else; as those families aged (and the newer families bought houses further out), the age demographic changed completely, and the malls that relied on families with young children started to suffer. this goes right back to population and employment density; had those areas developed in an urban mixed-use fashion, with a diverse housing stock (ie: houses and apartments) near large employment centers, the area would have had space for people of all ages, resulting in a mall that could rely on a mixed-age clientele fairly consistently.

when we continue to develop in a single-use, low density, sprawl fashion, we almost always end up with neighbourhoods full of elderly people 30+ years after the houses were built, who have entirely different needs than they did when they bought their homes. this ensures retail in this area won't be able to consistently rely on a strong customer base.

walkable, higher density, and mixed-use surroundings with many employers-- these are the factors that have kept perimeter mall and lenox square successful, because there are always people of all ages living and working there, and there will always be another generation to keep retail thriving.

[JPD]

Originally Posted by cwkimbro

Take Northlake and North Dekalb. In the 70s a much larger area on that map would have been middle/upper-middle class. The mall thrived.

Nowadays it has one nice area surrounded by areas that have gone down hill, some by a severe extent. The high-density areas have gone downhill the most. It has lost a big portion of the spending power that existed in its market in the '70s.

What is the one nice area you're referring to?

[bu2]

Originally Posted by cwkimbro

Bryant,

First let me just say thanks for posting these images.

Secondly, What I was saying wasn't all opinion. Some of it was me describing in words what can be seen. I directly referred to some of those areas that were worse off on the socio-economic scale.

Sadly, I just can't go to this much trouble every time someone makes a one-line comment. It is far too easy for me just to type out a respond to JPD.


I disagree with you in parts, but I can a see issue of coorelation with outside shared variables and possibly even multicollinearity in parts.

I know you have similar interest in researching cities. I'm not sure if you are familiar with basic theories on optimal locations of economic functions of cities, like a concentric zone model, Sector Model or a multple-nuceli model.

The issue is retail areas generally like high levels of access, which are shared and valued by other economic functions and employers.


The mall needs a population with more expendable income in their market area. That generates sales.

I want to jump to Gwinnett really quick. Everyone is talking about the struggling Gwinnett Place Mall. The centers that are doing well in Gwinnett are the Mall of Georgia, The Forum, and The Shoppes (formerly Avenue) at Webb Gin. (I'm giving Sugarloaf mills a neutral. It was technically built as an outlet mall.)

If we want density and employment, the clear winner should be Gwinnett Place Mall.

Mall of Georgia and Webb Gin are away from employment centers and density outside the jobs from the retail functions. What they share is large amounts of of low to medium density suburbs that are mostly middle and upper middle class (with a few rich people in the mix) across a large market area. Even with low density there is alot of spending power across the whole market area, which for a regional mall is a large area.

The Forum isn't that dense of an area, but there is a great deal of employment in that area.

Gwinnett Place has a great deal of density and employment, even to levels many people don't realize. Much of it is caused by aging apartment complexes and condos, which is bringing in people with less expendable income. Gwinnett Place thrived in the early 90s when the landscape was more middle/upper middle class suburban homes immediately around it. Some of their market is lost to competition from MoG/Forum/Avenue/Mill, but a large portion of their market area also became poorer (even though denser). Areas from north Lilburn to south Norcross and parts of South Duluth and Lawrenceville have lost wealth since the '90s by large amount. The people in these areas now just do not have as much expendable income as they use to.


I think overall it is how much spending power exists. That could come from a high population density of middle to high-income households or a wide-spread landscape of middle to higher income households.


Take Northlake and North Dekalb. In the 70s a much larger area on that map would have been middle/upper-middle class. The mall thrived.

Nowadays it has one nice area surrounded by areas that have gone down hill, some by a severe extent. The high-density areas have gone downhill the most. It has lost a big portion of the spending power that existed in its market in the '70s.

Its end result is the mall continues to exist and function. There is some money, but there isn't near as much as there use to be. That leads to limited investment and quality disruption of some shops.

North DeKalb and Northlake also have poor locations as far as access. Northlake is a pain to get to compared to nearby Target. Its near 285, but not easily accessible and not very visible. North DeKalb is at a dead end freeway (which was supposed to continue on) in one of the most congested parts of the metro area. Traffic also hurts Northlake as it eliminates easy access from relatively higher income inner DeKalb on weeknights.

There's also kind of a vicious cycle on meeting the needs of customers. As you meet the needs of lower income customers moving into the area, you tend to drive off the higher end.

[bu2]

Originally Posted by JPD

What is the one nice area you're referring to?

Look at Bryant's maps. Its an island.

[bu2]

Originally Posted by bryantm3

cwkimbro, i actually think we agree on this, we're just coming at it from two different angles. you are right about the areas in gwinnett, where the population has aged and has fewer children than at one time. the same is true around north dekalb mall and northlake. however, if you get down to *why* those areas did not continue to attract young residents, the reason is that the area was all built around the same time in a low density sprawl format.

those neighbourhoods around these failing malls were built only to house young families, and no one else; as those families aged (and the newer families bought houses further out), the age demographic changed completely, and the malls that relied on families with young children started to suffer. this goes right back to population and employment density; had those areas developed in an urban mixed-use fashion, with a diverse housing stock (ie: houses and apartments) near large employment centers, the area would have had space for people of all ages, resulting in a mall that could rely on a mixed-age clientele fairly consistently.

when we continue to develop in a single-use, low density, sprawl fashion, we almost always end up with neighbourhoods full of elderly people 30+ years after the houses were built, who have entirely different needs than they did when they bought their homes. this ensures retail in this area won't be able to consistently rely on a strong customer base.

walkable, higher density, and mixed-use surroundings with many employers-- these are the factors that have kept perimeter mall and lenox square successful, because there are always people of all ages living and working there, and there will always be another generation to keep retail thriving.

And then it changes. Sometimes it goes downhill. Sometimes new families start moving in. I think Druid Hills has gone through that cycle about 3 times. In the 1910s-20s millionaires lived there. It went way downhill as those people aged or moved out, but renewed in the 50s with lots of younger families. Then it aged again. Fernbank ES was down to 400 student in the early 90s. 15-20 years later it was up to 700 students and there were lots more kids in the area. I suspect its starting to head into the aging cycle again.

One of the issues in the Atlanta metro is that the housing stock on the north and east side ITP is largely from the 60s and 70s. Its hit that cycle. And a lot of the houses need renovation, especially the ones with long time owners.

[bu2]

Originally Posted by cwkimbro

Income Changes in Metro Atlanta: Meandering... |

This has alot of good supporting maps that I can't take the time to post as images, but wanted to share.

I would pay some attention to the ones of family income change from 1970 to 2013 on slides 11 and 12 of the power point and look at the north dekalb area closely.

Slide 6 has a good map to look at for the metro area to examine where wealth is today.

These maps show what CW and I have been saying about DeKalb. Note slides 11-16. Its most dramatically displayed on slide 15 which shows the neighborhoods with the greatest declines in income.

Unrelated, but slide 4 shows why the rest of Georgia resents it when metro Atlanta says it wants the state to help fund its needs. Southwest Georgia (below Columbus and west of I-75) has only a single county (looks like Lee-suburban Albany) in the top 40% of counties in income. Clayton, by far the lowest in metro Atlanta is still #59 of 160 in the state.

[JPD]

Originally Posted by bu2

Look at Bryant's maps. Its an island.

Bryant's map shows a island of light color around Northlake, which means not a lot of low incomes. The lighter colored areas which engulf Nothlake encompass several different areas (many of which I've already named in this discussion), and that's why I asked what the "one area" is that CW is referring to.

[cwkimbro]

Originally Posted by JPD

Bryant's map shows a island of light color around Northlake, which means not a lot of low incomes. The lighter colored areas which engulf Nothlake encompass several different areas (many of which I've already named in this discussion), and that's why I asked what the "one area" is that CW is referring to.

You're problem and we have continually tried discussing this....

Is you are acting like the market/trade area for a mall is the size of a market/trade area for a grocery store.

You're fixated on a small strip that goes northeast-southwest within a 5 minute drive of just northlake.

The area is much bigger than that and we are also talking about North Dekalb. Look due east of it. That area has lost alot of spending power since they were built.

[aries4118]

Originally Posted by cwkimbro

Income Changes in Metro Atlanta: Meandering... |

This has alot of good supporting maps that I can't take the time to post as images, but wanted to share.

I would pay some attention to the ones of family income change from 1970 to 2013 on slides 11 and 12 of the power point and look at the north dekalb area closely.

Slide 6 has a good map to look at for the metro area to examine where wealth is today.

So good...