Promenade Update - Outlet Mall Coming to Elk Grove (Sacramento: homes, to buy)

[caligirlz]

I hope the EG outlet has different stores than Folsom.

There are actually 2 outdoor "malls" in Folsom, the outlets & the Palladio. As for the Palladio, they are considered a "lifestyle" center (an imitation downtown IMO) vs the huge parking lots surrounded by shopping buildings like those found at the outlets. I don't like the parking set up at the Palladio. I think most people, like myself, prefer easier access parking, or semi store front parking. I suppose one good thing about having the majority of the parking in garages, is the shade.

The heat in Sacramento is NOTHING like Tulare. NOTHING. But that ever stopped us from shopping.

[NewToCA]

Originally Posted by Maxwell82

Looks like this mall is finally going to happen!! Looks like it's going to be a discount mall for designer clothes!!

Elk Grove Promenade Mall to Become Outlet Mall (Updated) - Breaking News - Elk Grove, CA Patch

From your link, I saw an interesting comment:

"I am intrigued by the notion of an upscale outlet mall," Davis said in an email. "Especially if it were to be sort of a hybrid - with a movie theater, restaurants, and other entertainment. Given the recent increase in retail stores coming to Elk Grove, I think it would do well."...

"And, we need to ensure any new proposal is vetted through the public process."


Now, though I realize this will put me in the severe minority here I think that comment is really bad. The original Lent Ranch Mall was killed because it took too long to get set up, due to the extensive multiple reviews involving public input.

The retail analysis should be done by the professionals in the business. The city should have rules and regulations in place concerning what can be built (zoning) and what it should look like (design guidelines and signage requirements). The public should be very marginal in this process, otherwise they might be finding they lose out on this development too.

[Maxwell82]

Originally Posted by NewToCA

From your link, I saw an interesting comment:

"I am intrigued by the notion of an upscale outlet mall," Davis said in an email. "Especially if it were to be sort of a hybrid - with a movie theater, restaurants, and other entertainment. Given the recent increase in retail stores coming to Elk Grove, I think it would do well."...

"And, we need to ensure any new proposal is vetted through the public process."


Now, though I realize this will put me in the severe minority here I think that comment is really bad. The original Lent Ranch Mall was killed because it took too long to get set up, due to the extensive multiple reviews involving public input.

The retail analysis should be done by the professionals in the business. The city should have rules and regulations in place concerning what can be built (zoning) and what it should look like (design guidelines and signage requirements). The public should be very marginal in this process, otherwise they might be finding they lose out on this development too.

Hmm another potential roadblock...this has already been dragging on for well over a decade. I hope it happens. Elk Grove is always growing, and they could use a mall out there...I know I'd go check it out.

[wburg]

Public comment doesn't kill a project--the mall died half-built because malls are becoming kind of obsolete, and because of its timing during an economic downturn. Its location is on the very southern edge of the urban services boundary (the land to the south is still farmland) and the traditional thought when you build a mall is that it becomes a lot easier to justify turning that farmland into new suburban developments. That's how developments got built from the 1940s through the 1990s--Town & Country Village, Arden Fair Mall, Florin Mall, Sunrise Mall, all the way to Roseville Galleria in 2000. You build a mall in the middle of farmland, then justify development based on traffic to the mall--and the mall's presence encourages people to buy in that development, as they know they can get their shopping done nearby. Simply put, malls make sprawl. More recent state and regional policy is based on limiting greenfield sprawl, and it was that change in policy, rather than public comment, that hung up the efforts of the mall developers.
What they mean by "the public process" is the entitlement process and environmental review, the legally required stuff, including public disclosure and maybe a few public meetings. But comments at public meetings aren't what decides whether a project gets done.

[NewToCA]

Originally Posted by wburg

Public comment doesn't kill a project--the mall died half-built because malls are becoming kind of obsolete, and because of its timing during an economic downturn. Its location is on the very southern edge of the urban services boundary (the land to the south is still farmland) and the traditional thought when you build a mall is that it becomes a lot easier to justify turning that farmland into new suburban developments. That's how developments got built from the 1940s through the 1990s--Town & Country Village, Arden Fair Mall, Florin Mall, Sunrise Mall, all the way to Roseville Galleria in 2000. You build a mall in the middle of farmland, then justify development based on traffic to the mall--and the mall's presence encourages people to buy in that development, as they know they can get their shopping done nearby. Simply put, malls make sprawl. More recent state and regional policy is based on limiting greenfield sprawl, and it was that change in policy, rather than public comment, that hung up the efforts of the mall developers.
What they mean by "the public process" is the entitlement process and environmental review, the legally required stuff, including public disclosure and maybe a few public meetings. But comments at public meetings aren't what decides whether a project gets done.

I agree that the project died half built because of the economic downturn. However, the start of construction was delayed by at least a couple of years due to the Elk Grove elected officials repeatedly stalling the approval due to both new input from the citizens and attempts to "optimize commercial efforts" in order to maximize their potential tax collections.

Your observation about building malls and then incrementally increasing sprawl is what I've observed the past 50 years or so too, and much of it done very well (such as Echelon Mall in New Jersey, Fair Oaks Mall in Fairfax, VA, or Polaris Mall in Columbus, OH). But the economy has changed this a bit, and frankly I think that shopping itself has undergone a significant revolution due to the internet, resulting in this past development process no longer being reliable.

[Malloric]

So what caused all the Elk Grove greenfield development since there's no mall in Elk Grove? Seems more like the classic correlation-causation dichotomy. Just because it's convenient to develop malls in the same places its convenient to develop period doesn't mean that malls cause development. Or another way of thinking about it is that the development in Elk Grove caused the mall. I mean, I suppose we'll see. I don't foresee Elk Grove growing faster once the mall finished any time ever than it did in 2004-2005. I could be wrong. If there's 300,000 people living in Elk Grove in 2020, I'll concede that I might have been wrong.

[wburg]

I think I missed the part where I said that sprawl only occurs where malls exist, and under no other conditions...oh yeah, because that's not what I said. Elk Grove sprawled because there was cheap farmland to buy, lots of population pressure, easy money, and convenient highway access, plus new employment centers like Apple. But if Elk Grove today already has over 100,000 people, why put the mall on the very southern edge of the city, next to farmland, at the farthest point from Elk Grove and Sacramento residents? To leverage the urban services boundary farther south.

[Malloric]

So in other words, you have all the same reasons for growth you had before and then you add a mall. How do you apportion the growth to the mall and the growth that would occur without. It seems to me that you do need to apportion and not just point to the mall and attribute all the growth.

You might as well replace mall with home depot or auto dealership. Those seem to usually be built at the edge of town where land is cheap and a big chunk of it available.

[wburg]

See the part up above where I said that I wasn't attributing all the growth to the mall? Maybe you missed it. It's a catalyst for more sprawl on the urban perimeter, not the sole possible reason for sprawl.

[CeJeH]

There are already plans in place to extend Grant Line road/ Kammerer Road out to I-5 to create the Eastside Beltway that would connect I-5 to hwy 50 thru Elk Grove/Rancho Cordova/Folsom, and that new expressway to border right along the south side of the mall. Also RT has tentative plans to extend light rail to the area adjacent to the Mall. I don't think they're doing it to extend the urban services boundary it sounds to me like the plan has been to extend out there regardless for a long time