Critical Issues for Retailers in Vertical Mixed-Use Projects

Introduction. Retailers leasing space in mixed-use projects encounter critical issues that might be of little or no concern in traditional shopping centers. Vertical mixed-use projects (multi-story buildings with subterranean parking or attached parking structures, one or more floors of retail at the base, and offices, apartments or condominiums above) present even greater challenges. This article addresses some of these issues and offers practical suggestions for their resolution.

Background.  The complexity inherent in vertical mixed-use project leasing reflects both the manner in which such projects are subdivided (separate legal parcels created by horizontal planes are stacked upon each other like layers of a wedding cake) and the competing concerns of the different users of the project (e.g., retailers may prefer early-morning or late-evening deliveries, but residents may be disturbed by the noise generated by large trucks). Horizontal subdivision gives developers the flexibility to sell or lease parking areas to third-party operators in order to help finance the project or to form joint ventures with well-known residential builders for development and marketing of luxury apartments or condominiums. As a result, the project will be subject to one or more sets of covenants, conditions and restrictions designed to allow the project to operate as a fully-integrated community despite the separation of ownership interests and competing expectations and demands of occupants. Additional restrictions may be contained in a development agreement between the developer and a redevelopment agency or other governmental authority exercising control over the project, or in a conditional use permit issued in connection with a zoning variance.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            

Site Plan. Unlike the single-page site plan attached to most shopping center leases, the site plan for a vertical mixed-use project consists of multiple pages showing parking levels, retail levels, and other relevant areas; paths of travel between the retail stores and the office and residential components; shared facilities such as loading docks, trash areas, and delivery storage areas; access and visibility corridors, no-build areas, and restricted-use zones; sign areas reserved to tenant or  to landlord; reserved and restricted parking areas; valet drop-off points; and any other areas that are difficult to describe by narrative.  A thorough review of the lease and the site plan should be made to confirm that all lease references to the site plan are reflected on the site plan, and that all areas outlined on the site plan are referenced in the lease. Subsequent to lease execution, changes to the site plan may be required in order to reflect the needs of new tenants or demands of governmental agencies. Although material changes should be subject to the reasonable approval of any tenant with a signed lease, the tenant should understand that the mixed-use project is a work in process until final permits are issued and that the price of being unwilling to include some flexibility in its lease for future site plan modifications may be that its lease gets put on the back-burner, resulting in loss of negotiating leverage and raising the possibility that it may be replaced by a more cooperative tenant.

Parking. One of the most difficult aspects of developing and managing a mixed-use project is the allocation of parking spaces in a manner that satisfies the needs of retail customers and employees, office workers and visitors, and residents and guests. The need to satisfy increased parking demands of holiday shoppers during November and December provides a further complication. A retailer expects its customers to find parking near a mall or store entrance without delay and to be directed to its store by appropriate signage. An adequate number of spaces in defined areas must be reserved for the exclusive use of retail customers. Nights and weekends, retail customers should have access to unreserved office parking spaces. Restaurants will want spaces reserved for customers picking up take-out orders.

Retailers of all sizes will demand that landlords provide free or reduced-rate for customers or provide a system for point-of-sale validation either with or without a purchase; the success of these demands will be determined by prevailing market forces, but retailers should understand that developers view the parking areas as a profit center, and projected revenues may be relied upon by lenders. If valet parking is provided, a conveniently located drop-off area should be identified and a specified area of the garage or parking structure should be reserved for valet-parked cars. Employee parking may be limited or subject to monthly charges; this issue should be addressed as early as possible because most retailers are accustomed to unlimited free parking for employees in traditional shopping centers.

 Tenants should be cautious of provisions that allow access to parking areas to be restricted or for parking areas to be closed for “special events” or “periodic street fairs.” A “special event” may not benefit all or even a majority of tenants; parking structures may be closed and tented for movie premieres or corporate charity events. “Periodic” street fairs and farmers’ markets may occur weekly. Each tenant will have to balance the benefit conferred by the increase in foot traffic against the detriment caused by the loss of parking and the street closure. If the project is near a stadium, arena, theater, convention center or other venue, the landlord may attempt to set aside parking that it or its third-party operator can sell to patrons of those venues at premium rates; again, each tenant will have to evaluate the net benefit of such an arrangement.

Marketing.          Retail tenants in mixed-use projects have a large pool of potential customers on the office and residential floors above them. This is especially beneficial for restaurants. But it may be difficult to market to office workers and residential occupants because retail leases for mixed-use projects often prohibit distribution of flyers, coupons and other advertising media within the project. More acceptable methods of building a customer base may include sponsoring social gatherings within the project, offering incentives to customers who refer other staff or residents of the building, providing delivery and catering services within the project, and being included on any project directories, signs, electronic displays or other joint advertising media. 

Phased Construction.     The retail floors of a high-rise mixed use project are often completed before the office and residential floors. If construction on the exterior of the building is complete, the garage is finished and accessible from adjacent public streets, and there are no impediments to customers’ use of common areas to access the retail areas, then the construction of interior tenant improvements is unlikely to disrupt retail operations. However, to the extent a retailer is counting on the patronage of residents and office workers in order to meet sales goals, it may be prudent to delay rent commencement until occupancy rates in the office and residential components have reached specified levels.  If a retailer must open while work is being completed, then staging areas for storing equipment and materials and for performing finish work should be limited to areas delineated on a site plan attached to the lease. Any construction immediately above, below or adjacent to a retail tenant that creates noise or vibration should be performed outside of Tenant’s business hours. 

Signs. The urban location and large footprint of vertical mixed-use projects allow for many signs to be placed around the exterior of the building, including blade signs outside each shop, large signs on the facades identifying anchor tenants, Landlord’s signs offering office and residential space for lease, and, if permitted by local regulations, video screens and electronic billboards capable of displaying multiple advertisements. The retail tenants in the project should have the right to be represented on such signs, and the landlord should not be allowed to show ads of competitors of such tenants. In addition, there should be a prohibition on placement of signs that would obscure a retail tenant’s signs; this requires a protected area that is three-dimensional to account for hanging signs and signs that draw attention away from the protected signs.

Common Area Maintenance Costs.         Allocating CAM expenses in a vertical mixed-use project is a challenge for a landlord, and determining if the allocation is reasonable is an even bigger challenge for a tenant. The retail lease should provide for an initial allocation to be made among the retail, office and residential components of the project, and then for the amount allocated to the retail component to be sub-allocated among the stores and restaurants on either a pro-rata basis or pursuant to a formula designed to separate different levels of use. Given the discretion afforded to landlords in these situations, it is important for the tenant to secure the right to perform annual audits of landlord’s books and records as they relate to CAM expenses for the entire project. The landlord may attempt to limit the audit to expenses concerning only the retail component, but a determination of the appropriateness of the allocation to the retail component cannot be made in a vacuum.  However, in fairness to the landlord, the retail tenant has no reason to examine costs that were not included in its CAM expenses for the year in question.  It is important to remember that retailers pay a straight pass-through of CAM expenses, whereas office tenants typically pay only increases over a base year, and apartment tenants pay a gross rent with actual expenses absorbed by landlords. Landlords have an incentive to place as much of the CAM expense as possible onto the retail component due to the complete pass-through of those expenses to the retailers. Parking fees collected by landlord should be applied against parking garage and structure operating, repair and maintenance costs, with only the balance of unrecovered costs included in CAM expenses.                                    

Delivery Issues.  Retail tenants in vertical mixed-use projects may be required to share loading docks with other retailers as well as with moving vans and office supply trucks. Demand for dock space may require that trucks be unloaded more quickly than in traditional shopping centers. The retailer may want to negotiate for secure storage space in the dock area; this allows for merchandise to be removed from trucks immediately and then protected until employees can safely transfer items from the dock to the store. If the only path of travel from the loading area to the store is through common areas, retailers may consider requiring the landlord to provide a security guard escort in order to clear a path. Restrictions on hours of deliveries should be carefully reviewed; these restrictions may prove particularly problematic for restaurants receiving perishable foods such as fish or produce from a supplier distributing to multiple customers.  The delivery restrictions should not apply to FedEx, UPS or other carriers whose hours are beyond tenant’s control.

Summary. As suburban sprawl reaches its limits in many areas, and as so-called “affordable” housing requires the homeowner to commute an hour or more to work, vertical mixed-use projects concentrated in urban areas are providing people with the opportunity to live, work and shop without getting anywhere near a crowded freeway. The concept is nothing new for New York City or Chicago, but for many areas such as Southern California where the solution to increased housing demand for the last hundred years has been to extend the freeway another mile and turn more farms into tract homes, the shift in thinking about quality of life issues has raised new challenges for retailers planning growth strategies. City planners are revising plan approval criteria to force multi-unit residential projects to include retail components. While the suburban shopping centers seem safe bets as they are repositioned as “lifestyle centers,” everyone on the retailer’s team must be prepared for the increasing importance of urban mixed-use locations in the retailer’s portfolio.

Smoking Ban Enforcement by Landlords and Tenants

With so many new studies and information emerging regarding the health and financial effects of smoking and second-hand smoke, many states and localities have strengthened their anti-smoking laws. As a result, both Landlords and Tenant must educate themselves on their state, city and county current anti-smoking laws.

In California, smoking is banned in all workplaces and within 20 feet of any door or window of a government building (including any building not owned but leased by a government entity and any public building leased to a private entity). Many cities have enacted even more strict laws. In 2006, for example, Calabasas, California enacted possibly the most severe smoking restriction in the country. Under this ordinance, smoking is forbidden in all indoor and outdoor public places, common areas of multi-unit residential buildings, and even open areas of hotels, bars, and restaurants. 

On May 1, 2007, a new Arizona law went into effect which banned smoking in all workplaces, including restaurants and bars. The statute also prohibits smoking in enclosed areas, public places and areas within 20 feet of any retail or commercial building.

Owners and property managers must try to stay on top of any new laws which affect how they manage and control their center. The smoking laws of many states require that very specific types of signs be posted, ashtrays be removed and that any offender be notified of his or her illegal behavior and requested to stop immediately. 

Besides being an additional compliance burden for the Landlord, it can also be a tenant headache. If the tenant controls any patio or other outdoor area, or if the tenant operates in a state where smoking is prohibited within 20 feet of any business entrance, then policing smokers becomes a tenant responsibility as well. Many municipalities' laws provide for a fine or citation for each violation, and if the party in control of the area does not comply with the statute, it can be fined and cited - not just the smoker. Also important to note is that a tenant could easily be in default under its lease for noncompliance with applicable law. Tenants should be especially wary if their leases contain any provision which takes away any of their rights (e.g., options to extend, etc.) should they, at any point during the lease, be in default under the lease, even if such default is timely cured.

Developers and Local Residents Clash Over Southern California Development

All across Southern California, the battle over the size, location and scale of development continues.

Santa Monica

In 2004, Santa Monica residents blocked Macerich's plans for redeveloping the three-story, 570,000 square-foot Santa Monica Place Shopping Center and replacing it with three 21-story condominiums, retail, restaurants and offices. Macerich has recently scaled back plans for the center, providing for the same footprint as the original building, but with an open air center, a third floor dining deck overlooking the ocean and a more open, village-like feel to connect to the Third Street Promenade. In March, Macerich submitted this plan to the City of Santa Monica and has received relatively positive initial reaction from the community. The approval process is expected to continue through this summer. 

Sherman Oaks

In the Sherman Oaks area of Los Angeles, Westfield has recently proposed expanding the 867,000 square foot Westfield Fashion Square by 280,000 square feet, adding 80 new stores, expanding and remodeling the food court, adding a 5-story parking garage and updating the exterior. Although many area residents dissatisfied with the out –of-date center are thrilled with idea, a significant opposition has formed, concerned with increases in traffic to the center, particularly on the weekends and holidays. The next step is an Environment Impact Report assessing the expansion and a public hearing where the local community may voice their concerns and/or support for the expansion.

Should a Retail or Commercial Tenant Get Title Insurance?

As with everything else in law, the answer is, that depends. Title insurance protects against (1) any flaw, fraud or other defect in the chain of title on a particular property (i.e., forgery on a deed, incapacity by the person who signed a previous deed, lack of authorization to convey the property, etc.), (2) any unpaid real estate taxes or liens (except those shown as exceptions to the policy), and (3) in the 2006 ALTA title policy, any problem on the property which would be disclosed by a survey (except those specified as exceptions to the policy). Although the likelihood of one of these events occurring is small, the outcome is so catastrophic, including loss of ownership of the property or loss of leasehold, that it is generally a good idea to get a title insurance policy. It is worth noting, however, that title insurance only covers defects in title from the date of your policy backward. If a mechanics' lien is placed on a property after the date of the policy, you will not be covered by the policy.

Large Shopping Center Tenants

Many retail tenants of large shopping centers feel that leasehold title insurance is unnecessary. Particularly in a large shopping center with an owner like Westfield or General Growth (especially if the center is financed) a tenant may reasonably expect that the landlord and lender have done their homework to ensure that title is in order. On the extremely rare chance that there is a defect that did show up on the title policy, the landlord's title company will indemnify the landlord for the cost of fixing it (up to the amount of the policy).

Other Tenants

If, however, a tenant is entering into a ground lease, a lease at a small center or a lease of a single building, it is advisable to get title insurance to ensure that the tenant will not lose the building or other improvements it has invested in or lose out on a good location.

Cost of Title Insurance

It is a common complaint that the title policy premiums are expensive given how rarely a claim is paid by the insurer. The bulk of title insurance costs arise from prevention and research, rather than for paying claims. If a tenant is not interested in purchasing a title policy, it should at least review a recent title report to confirm that their landlord is the current fee owner of the property and that there are no liens, over due taxes or other items which could cause the tenant problems later on. There is usually a small fee to receive a Preliminary Title Report, but it is worth it to know what you may be getting into before a long term lease is signed.

Ill-Suited Lease Forms Cost Tenants

Strip mall or single-tenant building landlords often rely on pre-printed lease forms in an effort to keep costs down and simplify leasing. For some properties this works well enough, but only where the type of tenants are well suited to the lease form. Many landlords attempt to use an industrial tenant lease form for a restaurant, for example, or a single-tenant lease form for a multi-tenant building, resulting in an ill-fitted lease where the tenant suffers. In an industrial tenant lease, such as the AIR Industrial/Commercial Tenant Lease form, the tenant typically pays for any malfunction or failure of the HVAC system after the first 6 months of the Lease, and all "other elements" of the premises after 30 days. In addition, this form requires the tenant to share in the cost prorata of any capital improvement for the entire Project or Building. Particularly if this is small strip mall with two or three tenants, this cost could be enough to put the tenant out of business. Similarly, in a single-tenant lease form, the tenant is often required to replace and maintain all of the building systems, roof, exterior of the building, etc. Tenants of a multi-tenant building with shared building systems, roof and building exterior should share such maintenance and typically, the Landlord would replace such items (perhaps with the cost amortized over the useful life) and pass portions of the cost through to all of the tenants annually. An inappropriate Lease form could easily cost a tenant thousands of dollars over the lease term.

Key Issues Regarding Tenant Improvements

Most commercial leases require some level of costruction or remodeling to make the leased premises suitable for the tenant.  The following are some key issues to consider when entering into a lease that requires construction or remideling:

  • What type of shell is being delivered? Is the Landlord going to demolish the prior tenant's build-out? If so, is the Landlord delivering the space vanilla shell or build-to-suit? Does the lease contain detailed descriptions of the scope of each party's required work?
  • Tenant Improvement Allowance: How much, how and when is it paid, is it enough? If the tenant does not use the full TI allowance, can Tenant keep the unused amount?
  • Does the TI Allowance cover architecture and engineering fees, or just contractors, subcontractors and materials?
  • Can the tenant keep any of the existing improvements of the prior tenant (i.e., the HVAC unit)?
  • What type of Landlord review of Tenant plans is required? When are plans due to the Landlord? How long does the Landlord have to review them before getting back to the Tenant?
  • Does Tenant's construction have to be completed by a certain time? If so, are there penalties incurred if not completed by this deadline?
  • Does the Landlord get paid an administrative fee to review the construction (frequently 15%)? Is the Landlord paid an additional fee to review plans?
  • Is the Tenant required to use union labor?
  • Is the Tenant required to get its general contractor approved in advance or does the Landlord get to choose the contractor?
  • Does the Tenant Improvement Allowance have to be paid back to the Landlord if there is any default under the Lease? If so, is it a full reimbursement or is it amortized over the lease term?

Include Early Exit Strategies in Leases to Handle Permit and Construction Delays

At the beginning of lease negotiations, landlord and tenant are typically enthusiastic about the project and are eager to move forward. Following the conclusion of a successful negotiation however, if construction of either the entire center or tenant's premises is involved, this enthusiasm can quickly turn into animosity. It is often said that construction typically takes twice as long and costs twice as much as planned, yet many parties fail to address that issue in their lease. 

If the landlord is performing construction work before delivering the premises to the tenant, then the lease should clearly set forth benchmark dates by which landlord must secure permits and approvals, commence construction, and complete construction. If any of those deadlines are not met, then tenant should have the right to terminate the lease and to recover liquidated damages on account of the significant time and money spent in due diligence, permitting, tenant improvements and attorneys fees. Deadlines should be subject to extension for events beyond the control of Landlord and for delays caused by tenant or tenant's agents or contractors.

The landlord should also have a termination right if it is unable to obtain all required permits and approvals, or if the conditions attached to governmental approval render the project too expensive, or if the construction project gets bogged down in litigation with opponents of the project. The landlord should protect itself when constructing or remodeling the premises for a specific tenant to be as clear and precise as possible in the lease as to what improvements and finishes are to be used and exactly where they are to be located.

The lease should also provide tenant with the right to terminate if tenant does not receive all permits required to conduct its business within a reasonable time. This right should also include at least a 30 day extension option if tenant is close, but has not received its permits.

California Landlords May Arbitrarily Withhold Consent to Assignment and Subletting - Sometimes

Question:   If a lease of California real property prohibits assignment or subletting without lessor's consent, will a covenant not to unreasonably withhold consent be implied?

Answer:   It depends when the lease was signed.

Until 1985, California followed the majority common law rule that where a lease prohibits assignment or subletting without the landlord’s consent, such consent may be withheld arbitrarily and capriciously unless otherwise provided.  In Kendall v. Ernest Pestana, Inc., a very activist state Supreme Court headed by Chief Justice Rose Bird stunned the commercial real estate industry by adopting the minority rule, holding that where a lease prohibits assignment or subletting without the landlord’s consent, such consent may not be unreasonably withheld.  (In fairness, the real estate community had some forewarning of this outcome, because the same decision had been reached in a 1983 appellate court case, Cohen v. Ratinoff, but that case did not reach the Supreme Court).  The state’s landlords and their lawyers suddenly found themselves with leases that had effectively been rewritten by the Court to shift control of leased property to tenants.  This was a bitter pill to swallow in an era in which runaway inflation and rapid increases in property values had left the rent in long-term leases substantially lower than market rents, as the right to arbitrarily withhold consent to an assignment or subletting often gave a landlord leverage to force the termination of a below-market lease.  The state legislature promptly performed a balancing act by codifying the Kendall rule for all leases entered into on or after September 23, 1983 (the date of the Cohen decision), but reinstating the majority rule allowing lessors to arbitrarily withhold consent for leases entered into prior to such date.  See Civil Code Section 1995.210 – 1995.270.  Any real estate professional called upon to interpret an assignment or subletting clause requiring the lessor’s consent without qualification must first determine whether the effective date of the lease is before or after September 23, 1983.