This is one of the hardest truths in food-access work.
A community can have a very real need for grocery access and still lack enough purchasing power, population, traffic, or operating economics to support the store being proposed.
Those statements are not contradictory.
Need is not the same thing as feasibility.A feasibility process should be willing to ask uncomfortable questions:
- How many households are realistically in the trade area?
- Where are they shopping now?
- How much of that spending can the proposed store realistically capture?
- What competitors are within the actual travel pattern?
- What sales level is required to support payroll and occupancy?
- What gross profit dollars can the format produce?
- Does the proposed store have enough working capital?
- Is the building helping the concept or creating permanent operating costs?
- Does the product mix match what residents will actually buy?
- What happens in a downside scenario?
- If the store requires ongoing subsidy, is everyone honest about that?
A mission can justify investment.
It cannot repeal retail economics.
The best development work respects both realities: the community need
and the conditions required for a sustainable operation.
For people who have worked on grocery development: What assumption do you think new projects are most likely to overestimate?