This one is significant because of the size of land and the location (adjacent to Legacy Village and Beachwood Place).

 

From Cleveland.com: Land's future only a guess if Acacia sells

Posted by Jim Nichols August 19, 2008 20:16PM

 

LYNDHURST -- Lyndhurst Mayor Joseph Cicero hopes the prospect of Acacia Country Club's sale and development will roll out as smoothly as a putt on one of the golf club's well-tended greens.

But if the past is a predictor, Cicero should expect some of the same uncivil unrest that roiled his city and other eastern suburbs when the Legacy Village shopping center next door to the club was first proposed.

 

"We've come a long way since then," Cicero said on Tuesday. "There were a lot of fears then that proved to be unfounded."

 

 

Lyndhurst wants the tax dollars that neighboring Beachwood swallows daily, so Legacy Village was the first step. I'm certain that the city will do all it can to make this move forward and be the second step to financial independence. It's what this land is developed into that has me nervous.

 

On one hand, most anything big would be considered a setback to downtown Cleveland's emerging renaissance, whether it's retail, residential, or commercial. However, on the other hand, I'd rather see it happen in Lyndhurst than in Solon, or god forbid, Twinsburg. I live right by Legacy Village and I'm not exactly a fan of the damn place, but I'm glad that it was built there instead of Hudson or Twinsburg. I'll always support the county seat first, followed by the inner rings, followed by the in county suburbs before I ever support drudge like Twinsburg and their "proposed" "luxury lifestyle center".

 

What this all boils down to is the "lesser of the many evils".

^^ A regional government and simple county taxation code would stop this lunacy. As long as Cuyahoga County is carved into lots and lots of tax municipalities we'll see never ending retail redundancy and more "lesser of many evils".

The intersection of Richmond and Cedar may not be a nightmare, but points east toward Brainard is, and development of the Acacia land will only screw up the Cedar-Brainard-271 exit cluster even more.    Not to mention if BW Place and Legacy Village are any precedent, the development will have oceans of parking, more impervious cover that can't be good for Euclid Creek.  Bad idea jeans.

Looks like there are three offers for Acacia:

 

http://www.cleveland.com/sun/all/index.ssf/2010/04/shareholders_of_acacia_country.html

 

That area doesn't need anymore retail and probably doesn't need any more office space, but if I'm a Lyndhurst city official, that's what I'd be looking for.  Considering what neighboring Beachwood has carved out and horded for itself, Lyndhurst may be looking to get a piece of that action.

I think a cementary or private park would be kind of neat there.  Lyndhurst doesn't need more retail, especially in that area, and I can't imagine there's a major demand for even more high income housing these days. 

 

The real fear, I guess, would be low income housing/section 8.

The real fear, I guess, would be low income housing/section 8.

 

I just don't see that ever happening there, but who knows...

skate board park

public golf course

public golf course

 

If they go that route, are you thinking Metroparks?  Maniki has been maintained pretty nicely, so something like tha tmight be okay there.

 

I think I read that Lyndhurst has already been working to change zoning in that area, so I'm guessing there may be other ideas.

 

skate board park

 

Yeah, but what about the other 158 acres?  :yap:

public golf course

 

If they go that route, are you thinking Metroparks?

 

I'm just hoping.  I can't imagine that a public course with a new country club-style clubhouse couldn't do well in that area (plenty of golfers/people with money and a complete lack of public golf courses on the east side inside I-271).

public golf course

 

If they go that route, are you thinking Metroparks?

 

I'm just hoping. I can't imagine that a public course with a new country club-style clubhouse couldn't do well in that area (plenty of golfers/people with money and a complete lack of public golf courses on the east side inside I-271).

 

Bingo.  Metroparks could eventually sell the small portion set aside for the stalled housing development when the market impoves to pay off the purchase. 

Even though there is a decided lack of public courses in that part of town, given that there are too many courses (even public ones) serving too few golfers, there isn't that much value to keeping it as a course.  As it is, Metroparks loses money on golf.  Further, they generally acquire property that is adjacent to existing reservations.

I'd much prefer the metroparks turn Oakwood in CH/S Euclid into a public course.  Sounds like they could get that land cheaper.  Oakwood is on the market for $5,950,000.

Even though there is a decided lack of public courses in that part of town, given that there are too many courses (even public ones) serving too few golfers, there isn't that much value to keeping it as a course. As it is, Metroparks loses money on golf. Further, they generally acquire property that is adjacent to existing reservations.

 

Good points.  Highland isn't too far from Acacia, too.  If you live in that area, there are public golfing options available already.  I'd really prefer not to see anymore local taxpayer money invested in golf courses.

 

From an environmental point of view, golf courses use an incredible amount of water, and I'm sure they do all kinds of other damage their surroundings, as well.  Turning Acacia into a public park may not be a terrible idea, but I still get the impression that the new property owners (whomever they may be) will have bigger and perhaps better ideas.

I wonder what the residents of Three Villages will have to say! 

 

I live in Lyndhurst and would love to get some subsidies to keep our property taxes under control.

The "Most valuable piece of property in (NEO)" might end up as a park.  Mayor describes it as "unconscionable."

 

Conservation Fund offers $14.75 million to buy, preserve Acacia Country Club land in Lyndhurst

Published: Wednesday, August 15, 2012, 8:45 PM

  By Michelle Jarboe McFee, The Plain Dealer

 

LYNDHURST, Ohio -- A nonprofit conservation group is chasing Acacia Country Club, a 160-acre swath of open space that has kept developers salivating for decades.

 

Shareholders at the private club are considering yet another deal to sell their land, a high-profile golf course property in Lyndhurst. But for the first time, the would-be buyer isn't a real estate developer or a corporation.

 

...

 

http://www.cleveland.com/business/index.ssf/2012/08/conservation_group_offers_1475.html#incart_river_business

This will be a popular move on this board for many. Me? I'd much rather see a W Hotel, Roy's, Container Store, Von Mar, nice apartments, etc...

 

With that said, rather than citizens complaining about more development they don't want, it's refreshing to see a group actually step forward with big bucks to put their money where their mouth is. I loathe their effort and applaud their effort at the same time.

If this land is so valuable for development, I wonder if a developer will make one last gasp effort.... Would $20MM change Acacia's mind? It sure would make if Interesting...

It's funny seeing the mayor's reaction to the space becoming a park. Oh no! We can't build another mall or office park!

 

The skeptic in me says Acacia is just holding out for a better offer, using the preservationist offer as leverage. But they already have better offer from Hemingway. Maybe they think it's worth even more?

These developers are crazy. We have high vacancy in malls up and down the east side as well as empty office space and yet they want to build more!

Also, I wonder why this group didnt step in for Oakwood CC (I know it was talked about), since that was even more controversial in the sense of trying to prevent a developer from developing. 

 

Im not sure how developing this site would allow for things like a container store and such when there are already so many other half empty shopping centers and re-develop-able land nearby and all over.

"Im not sure how developing this site would allow for things like a container store and such when there are already so many other half empty shopping centers and re-develop-able land nearby and all over."

 

Agreed.

This is pretty huge if this goes through - a conservation group putting up $15m?!?!  I'm sure the Oakwood opponents are pretty upset this group didn't step in for them.

Oakwood wasn't on and off the market for as long as Acacia has been.  We don't know all the details yet, but I wonder whether the terms of the deal allow the golf course to remain, temporarily or permanently. 

I think this would be great for the region, but I'm becoming bitter about the fact that something like this didn't happen for Oakwood (which arguably needed it more than Acacia due to comparative locations and infrastructure).

 

This is the problem with our divided region.  The Lyndhurst mayor wants more tax dollars to ensure that his city (which isn't even needed) and his job remain viable.  Developers don't care about retail saturation and poaching, because as long as their project is the latest and greatest, they will be the beneficiary...at least until the next one comes along in a decade or so.  It's all about money for those at the top, but quality of life for the rest of us is not being improved.

 

What a gigantic mess.

I know, I know, but I read the Cleveland.com comments, and I'm shocked at how many (nearly all, a rarity) are in favor of the conservation group's offer to purchase this property. 

This will be a popular move on this board for many. Me? I'd much rather see a W Hotel, Roy's, Container Store, Von Mar, nice apartments, etc...

 

With that said, rather than citizens complaining about more development they don't want, it's refreshing to see a group actually step forward with big bucks to put their money where their mouth is. I loathe their effort and applaud their effort at the same time.

 

I fully agree with this. I live in this neighborhood but I'd prefer to see it developed over staying a golf course. I agree that the region is over-retailed but only in the lower and mid markets. Upscale? Not at all. Does anybody honestly think The Container Store wants to locate next to Walmart or Gordon Food Service? From their other locations, I find that wishful thinking. This region lacks upscale retail opportunities. I think that's why we lack so many retailers. The upscale centers are nearly full with little room to expand. The Acacia land could help solve that.

 

The next question is what will Conservation do with it? I have a feeling it will stay a GC which adds little to the area. I don't think they have the financials to convert it to a full blown park. Not to mention, I fear the land has environmental issues. If its a all purpose park, I think it does add to the region. I'm just a skeptic they will and can pull it off. Especially since they let Oakwood go which to me, needed to be consvered much more.

This will be a popular move on this board for many. Me? I'd much rather see a W Hotel, Roy's, Container Store, Von Mar, nice apartments, etc...

 

With that said, rather than citizens complaining about more development they don't want, it's refreshing to see a group actually step forward with big bucks to put their money where their mouth is. I loathe their effort and applaud their effort at the same time.

 

I fully agree with this. I live in this neighborhood but I'd prefer to see it developed over staying a golf course. I agree that the region is over-retailed but only in the lower and mid markets. Upscale? Not at all. Does anybody honestly think The Container Store wants to locate next to Walmart or Gordon Food Service? From their other locations, I find that wishful thinking. This region lacks upscale retail opportunities. I think that's why we lack so many retailers. The upscale centers are nearly full with little room to expand. The Acacia land could help solve that.

 

The next question is what will Conservation do with it? I have a feeling it will stay a GC which adds little to the area. I don't think they have the financials to convert it to a full blown park. Not to mention, I fear the land has environmental issues. If its a all purpose park, I think it does add to the region. I'm just a skeptic they will and can pull it off. Especially since they let Oakwood go which to me, needed to be consvered much more.

 

The Container Store is upscale?  Really?  You must have a very different definition of what qualifies as upscale.

 

In any event, Legacy Village and Beachwood Place have quite a bit of available retail space to let.  And a lot of what is there currently is frankly not all that high end.  If the upscale stores really wanted to enter the market there is no shortage of opportunities for them to do so.  So either they've concluded the market isn't there or the management companies (GGP (Beachwood) and First Interstate (Legacy Village)) aren't targeting them (which I find hard to believe).

^Exactly. From that abandoned book store at Legacy Village (Amongst many other vacancies) to the blank storefronts in Beachwood mall to the empty spaces that have never been occupied at University Square there is more than enough vacant retail space in a 3 mile radius for potential luxury stores to move in to. What makes anybody think they will move into a new mall when they haven't tried to move into the existing spaces?

I fully agree with this. I live in this neighborhood but I'd prefer to see it developed over staying a golf course. I agree that the region is over-retailed but only in the lower and mid markets. Upscale? Not at all.

Suburban development is nothing but a ponzi scheme. And the local politicians are just tax junkies looking for their next fix. Why redevelop existing property when it's easier and cheaper to build on empty green space.

 

For a region that isn't growing much, if at all, I don't see the benefit of new construction. That money is better off being used to redevelop an area that needs it -- like, oh, I don't know, almost every blighted neighborhood outside of Cleveland.

 

But it's not my money or property. And I don't even live in the area. So whatever happens, good luck to the folks in Lyndhurst.

^Exactly. From that abandoned book store at Legacy Village (Amongst many other vacancies) to the blank storefronts in Beachwood mall to the empty spaces that have never been occupied at University Square there is more than enough vacant retail space in a 3 mile radius for potential luxury stores to move in to. What makes anybody think they will move into a new mall when they haven't tried to move into the existing spaces?

Didn't you know retail space is single-use? If the store goes out of business, it needs to be abandoned and rebuilt the next town over.

Whether or not we like it, and despite all the social costs, Dwirthwein might be right that something shiny and new could attract retailers that existing developments couldn't.  I totally get his enthusiasm for development here.  Though personally I hope the club members accept the offer and that this land gets preserved. A W hotel in Lyndhurst just doesn't excite me all that much.

Yes, I consider Container Store upscale. Look at where they tend to locate. Near upscale and trendy retailers. That's the market that they like to be near. I'm sure there are exceptions but in my experience, they are always located in upscale neighborhoods.

 

You're correct that there's a handful of vacancies nearby bur Id add some caveats to that. The LaPlace space is weirdly configured (it's not a big open space) and the former Joseph Beth has that mezzanine in the way. For most retailers, that's a deterrent. There's no point in re-hashing the mess that's University Square. Either way, thats not exactly upscale anyways which is my point.

 

Container Store is just one example of a major brand that's avoided Cleveland. I'm not sure how anyone could say Cleveland doesn't lack upscale brands. We do. Now, it's certainly debatable as to why that is. I think part of it is there's a serious lack of upscale retail development here. For a market our size, we lack in that department. My belief is that an Acacia development would help fill that void. I'm not against making it into a park, but I don't think the region gains much by keeping it a golf course.

I'll say before someone else eventually does...**cough**Ikea**cough**.

 

Seriously though, my understanding is that Legacy Village was supposed to be multi-phase, but actually never got past it's initial phase.  It was supposed to have housing (of which it has none) and office space (of which it has very little).  Even if what's part of the current structure is unacceptable to potential tenants, I have to believe that there is enough open space on that property to build something else to suit an outlet like The Container Store.

 

Discussions like these really bring me to despise developers and how wasteful WE--the citizens--let them be in the way they pillage the land around us.  Cuyahoga County really could use something like a regional retail council to prevent this nonsense from happening over and over, especially if all of these unnecessary suburbs continue to insist on remaining independent.

Yes, I consider Container Store upscale. Look at where they tend to locate. Near upscale and trendy retailers. That's the market that they like to be near. I'm sure there are exceptions but in my experience, they are always located in upscale neighborhoods.

 

You're correct that there's a handful of vacancies nearby bur Id add some caveats to that. The LaPlace space is weirdly configured (it's not a big open space) and the former Joseph Beth has that mezzanine in the way. For most retailers, that's a deterrent. There's no point in re-hashing the mess that's University Square. Either way, thats not exactly upscale anyways which is my point.

 

Container Store is just one example of a major brand that's avoided Cleveland. I'm not sure how anyone could say Cleveland doesn't lack upscale brands. We do. Now, it's certainly debatable as to why that is. I think part of it is there's a serious lack of upscale retail development here. For a market our size, we lack in that department. My belief is that an Acacia development would help fill that void. I'm not against making it into a park, but I don't think the region gains much by keeping it a golf course.

 

With a few notable exceptions (Burberry, Cole Haan, Henri Bendel, Hugo Boss, Armani AX), Cleveland has a good cross-section what I would qualify as upper-mid to low high-end retail.  And what we lack in freestanding stores, places like Saks, Nordstroms, and Kilgore Trout pick up the slack.  The truly upscale retail stores - Barney's, Van Cleef & Arpels, Georgio Armani, Hermes, Cristofel, Jil Sanders, Theory, Ferragammo, etc., are never coming to Cleveland or any other mid-tier Midwest city for that matter.  As for the Container Store, it's a glorified Bed Bath & Beyond.  I'm not losing any sleep over our lack of that. 

 

The bigger issue here is that Lyndhurst has a generally bad track record of doing good/smart development.  Legacy Village is far from a shining example of outdoor retail and is easily outdone by Crocker Park, Easton, and even Eton Collection.  If the City had any good develoment sense, they would have insisted on Legacy having one or more parking garages instead of a sea of surface parking with its accompanying run-off.  The city also does little to enforce its housing code or otherwise work to improve the existing housing stock.  Nor has it done much of anything to improve or enhance its main commercial thoroughfare along Mayfield, much of which is beyond tired looking.  For all these reasons, I fear the city would approve just about anything on the Acacia property, with little regard to doing things right or preserving the integrity of the land.  Better that it be kept something of a green suburban oasis. 

I'll say before someone else eventually does...**cough**Ikea**cough**.

 

Seriously though, my understanding is that Legacy Village was supposed to be multi-phase, but actually never got past it's initial phase.  It was supposed to have housing (of which it has none) and office space (of which it has very little).  Even if what's part of the current structure is unacceptable to potential tenants, I have to believe that there is enough open space on that property to build something else to suit an outlet like The Container Store.

 

Discussions like these really bring me to despise developers and how wasteful WE--the citizens--let them be in the way they pillage the land around us.  Cuyahoga County really could use something like a regional retail council to prevent this nonsense from happening over and over, especially if all of these unnecessary suburbs continue to insist on remaining independent.

 

What happened was that TRW changed developers. The original development group was out of Chicago. It was to be much more urban oriented, much like heightsfan talks about - a la Easton and Crocker. For whatever reason, TRW kicked them out and sold it to First Interstate. This came AFTER Lyndhurst voters approved the zoning change. So, in actuality, Lyndhurst residents did not approve Legacy Village as its built today. They and the city expected something different. It was to be much more urban in nature with mixed use buildings. First Interstate had zero experience in upscale or urban development and it shows in their poor design. Today, the only free land at Legacy (unless you count the acres of parking) is slated for a boutique sized hotel that's been delayed for years. 

 

My hope was the Acacia land could be Legacy, done the correct way. True, that's a lot of assumptions and hope but I'd like to think the city learned its lesson from that.

I'll say before someone else eventually does...**cough**Ikea**cough**.

 

Seriously though, my understanding is that Legacy Village was supposed to be multi-phase, but actually never got past it's initial phase.  It was supposed to have housing (of which it has none) and office space (of which it has very little).  Even if what's part of the current structure is unacceptable to potential tenants, I have to believe that there is enough open space on that property to build something else to suit an outlet like The Container Store.

 

Discussions like these really bring me to despise developers and how wasteful WE--the citizens--let them be in the way they pillage the land around us.  Cuyahoga County really could use something like a regional retail council to prevent this nonsense from happening over and over, especially if all of these unnecessary suburbs continue to insist on remaining independent.

 

What happened was that TRW changed developers. The original development group was out of Chicago. It was to be much more urban oriented, much like heightsfan talks about - a la Easton and Crocker. For whatever reason, TRW kicked them out and sold it to First Interstate. This came AFTER Lyndhurst voters approved the zoning change. So, in actuality, Lyndhurst residents did not approve Legacy Village as its built today. They and the city expected something different. It was to be much more urban in nature with mixed use buildings. First Interstate had zero experience in upscale or urban development and it shows in their poor design. Today, the only free land at Legacy (unless you count the acres of parking) is slated for a boutique sized hotel that's been delayed for years. 

 

My hope was the Acacia land could be Legacy, done the correct way. True, that's a lot of assumptions and hope but I'd like to think the city learned its lesson from that.

 

So the zoning change referendum came BEFORE First Interstate became involved in the project?  Interesting, I never knew that.  Regardless, just about everything that was promised to residents for Legacy Village has come up short.

 

What part of the land is the boutique planned for?  I'm guessing the western portion close to Cedar Road?

I'll say before someone else eventually does...**cough**Ikea**cough**.

 

Seriously though, my understanding is that Legacy Village was supposed to be multi-phase, but actually never got past it's initial phase.  It was supposed to have housing (of which it has none) and office space (of which it has very little).  Even if what's part of the current structure is unacceptable to potential tenants, I have to believe that there is enough open space on that property to build something else to suit an outlet like The Container Store.

 

Discussions like these really bring me to despise developers and how wasteful WE--the citizens--let them be in the way they pillage the land around us.  Cuyahoga County really could use something like a regional retail council to prevent this nonsense from happening over and over, especially if all of these unnecessary suburbs continue to insist on remaining independent.

 

What happened was that TRW changed developers. The original development group was out of Chicago. It was to be much more urban oriented, much like heightsfan talks about - a la Easton and Crocker. For whatever reason, TRW kicked them out and sold it to First Interstate. This came AFTER Lyndhurst voters approved the zoning change. So, in actuality, Lyndhurst residents did not approve Legacy Village as its built today. They and the city expected something different. It was to be much more urban in nature with mixed use buildings. First Interstate had zero experience in upscale or urban development and it shows in their poor design. Today, the only free land at Legacy (unless you count the acres of parking) is slated for a boutique sized hotel that's been delayed for years. 

 

My hope was the Acacia land could be Legacy, done the correct way. True, that's a lot of assumptions and hope but I'd like to think the city learned its lesson from that.

 

So the zoning change referendum came BEFORE First Interstate became involved in the project?  Interesting, I never knew that.  Regardless, just about everything that was promised to residents for Legacy Village has come up short.

 

What part of the land is the boutique planned for?  I'm guessing the western portion close to Cedar Road?

 

The whole referendum was botched. TRW claimed they would stay if LV was approved. They left anyhow and then donated the building to the Clinic which left a hole in tax dollars since the Clinic is tax exempt.

 

The hotel (supposedly a high end brand but it was never named) was proposed off of Cedar adjacent to the estate. They even looked at using historic tax credits to renovate the old estate buildings and make them part of the hotel. It was to include an underground parking structure. It never left the planning commission stages after the economy crashed. Last I heard, they will try to revive it once demand grows in the hotel market.

As outlined in my CLE retail list - which I probably need to upload again to site, with updates - there are easily 2 dozen major upscale retailers or restaurants that are in the majority of the top 40 metro areas - but not in CLE. Not super-luxury dreams - just ones that even cities like Richmond or Raleigh have, let alone NYC...  I think suitable space has something to do with it. Yes, there are vacancies at BP, LaPlace and LV. However, are they the right spots?  Acacia would provide the right spot and visibility, plus the upscale hotel and offices that Cedar/Richmond is missing.  Can think of few major suburban upscale shopping areas without a Marriot/Hilton or higher level hotel adjacent to, even part of, shopping complex plus office towers...  Nice hotel would be a slam-dunk in Cedar/Richmond area.

But my question is how do you know Acacia would be the right spot? I'm sure developers of legacy thought they were the right spot to. I'd like to see Beachwood expand before building another mall that MIGHT be the right spot.

By "spot" I guess I mean the right location within a shopping complex, not the location of the shopping complex itself.  BP, La Place and Legacy are all In the right Cedar location. But if there are 20 key retailers missing from the market, but the 5 vacancies at BP are in the less upscale Dillards wing, or the less trafficked Saks wing, not near similar retailers, or perhaps the wrong size, or with tough parking (La Place), then those spotss are not spots retailers are flocking to. BP does need a new wing, with anchor at one end (even a smaller footprint like REI, Lands End, or somewhat larger Von Maur, etc...) and the right sized 20 store slots In between.  Or BP really needs to move lesser tenants to create space. Simon knows how to do this. Steiner, the Easton owner, knows how to do this. GGP is a big landlord, but they seem to be struggling at BP, though Athleta and perhaps others are still to be opening this year. Legacy has some things up its sleeve, too... not yet announced but could be fairly big.

the "Cleveland Retail Gaps" PDF - showing key retailers not yet in CLE - is attached to my post over in the Retail News section.

Why do people think Beachwood Place is struggling?  I'm not much of a mall shopper, but they do seem to have a pretty high occupancy when I got there.  I could give two shits about the Container Store, but sign me up on bringing an REI to Cleveland.

The whole referendum was botched. TRW claimed they would stay if LV was approved. They left anyhow and then donated the building to the Clinic which left a hole in tax dollars since the Clinic is tax exempt.

 

I wish I was paying closer attention back then, though that does seem vaguely familiar. 

 

TRW isn't even an independent company anymore, right?  So I guess it was almost inevitable that they weren't going to have their headquarters in Lyndhurst anymore regardless of what happened with the referendum (though the voters wouldn't have known that).

By "spot" I guess I mean the right location within a shopping complex, not the location of the shopping complex itself.  BP, La Place and Legacy are all In the right Cedar location. But if there are 20 key retailers missing from the market, but the 5 vacancies at BP are in the less upscale Dillards wing, or the less trafficked Saks wing, not near similar retailers, or perhaps the wrong size, or with tough parking (La Place), then those spotss are not spots retailers are flocking to. BP does need a new wing, with anchor at one end (even a smaller footprint like REI, Lands End, or somewhat larger Von Maur, etc...) and the right sized 20 store slots In between.  Or BP really needs to move lesser tenants to create space. Simon knows how to do this. Steiner, the Easton owner, knows how to do this. GGP is a big landlord, but they seem to be struggling at BP, though Athleta and perhaps others are still to be opening this year. Legacy has some things up its sleeve, too... not yet announced but could be fairly big.

 

I think what he may be asking is, since Legacy Village is relatively new, why wasn't it developed in a way that would have made it the "right spot" for any of these retailers that are conspicuously missing from Greater Cleveland?  Building on that point, what stores are currently at Legacy Village that are unique to the region?  Nordstrom Rack for sure.

 

Although I don't like First Interstate and would love nothing more than to see them get some competition that may potentially poach some of their nicer tenants, I still don't know if more retail is right for that area.  Traffic at the Cedar-Richmond intersection is a nightmare at certain times of day and when there is an accident or inclement weather.  If this idea were to somehow go through, I think the roads would absolutely have to be widened even further, and probably on the dime of either Lyndhurst or the developer.

As far as chains go:

 

LV unique retailers = Nordstrom Rack, Lilly Pulitzer, Bose (not counting Aurora outlet), Ecco, Restoration Hardware, CPK, Stir Crazy, Janie & Jack, maybe more, plus has been first local location for Cheesecake, Francesca's, Bar Louie, Brio, Charming Charlie, Tropical Smoothie, Apple, Coldwater Creek, etc.... But Legacy also has suffered from whole chains closing or drastically reducing stores - leaving them with key vacancies to fill... (Talbots Mens, Talbots kids, EXPO, Old Thyme Herbs, Galyans, Z Gallerie, Acorn, Sigrid Olsen, Bombay, Bombay Kids, Oshkosh, Ritz, J-B, and the list goes on...)

 

Beachwood Place unique = Nordstrom, Saks, Lacoste, Tumi, Lego, MaxStudio, Lush, Art of Shaving, Vera Bradley, Crabtree & Evelyn, Hanna Andersson, Arden B., Pottery Barn, True Religion, Madewell, Jessica McClintock, Athleta(coming), Maggiano's, Fossil, etc... and was first in area for many more prior to opening on west side, like Sephora, Lucky,

 

LaPlace unique = Pottery Barn Kids and BIG Williams-Sonoma.

 

Eton unique = Sur la Table, Paladar, Mitchell's, Orvis, Free People, Allen Edmonds, Blue Mercury (coming), North Face, etc... Plus first B Spot, Trader Joe's, Anthropologie, Fleming's, Bravo, Taza, Penzey's, Menchie's in area...

Smith: Beachwood Place currently has 4 vacancies in the Nordstrom wing (former Nine West, Marciano, luggage store, soon to close Jule, though temp massage place moving into luggage slot for now), 2 or 3 vacancies in the Saks wing (solstice and Sony Style, though at least half of Sony may be taken by Athleta, plus former Limited Too is being vacated by temp tenant... Unsure if It will remain empty or get filled). 2 vacancies in the Dillards wing (American Greetings, Bose) and the former M & S space out front. That's 9 of 10 empty store fronts, some vacant foe multiple year. There may be more. that's off the top of my head. Plus several key spaces are clearly temporary service businesses or local stores filling space until a national tenant can be found.... like eyebrow plucking place in Saks wing that was in center aisle of mall before. And many of the spaces are too small or wrong size for many of the retailers missing from market.

More telling to me is that when Arhaus closed next to Nordstrom after Legacy opening, , its space was filled by the BP offices,  a GNC and a tux rental store. In other malls, you will find Vuitton,  Tiffany, in the stores next to Nordstrom.  I don't get it.

 

Acacia would allow key retailers the adjacency they seek and the size they need. Otherwise, unsure what happens.

One new trend being adopted by some luxury retailers is to include a store within a store.  For example, Louis Vuitton built out quite a large store within Saks, and staffs it with their people.  I've heard rumors that Hugo Boss plans to do the same thing at our Saks. 

One new trend being adopted by some luxury retailers is to include a store within a store.  For example, Louis Vuitton built out quite a large store within Saks, and staffs it with their people.  I've heard rumors that Hugo Boss plans to do the same thing at our Saks.

 

According to Louis Vuitton's website, they already have the "store within a Saks" concept at Beachwood. Is that true? (sorry, I do not go to that Saks). If Hugo were to do the same at Beachwood Saks, would LV stay? At that point you're creating a luxury mall within a department store, no?