Ugh...well, I'm still skeptical about needing a new development at Acacia for all of those upscale retailers, though I do sort of understand the arguments for it.

 

Is there any open land anywhere else in the eastern suburbs, somewhat near 271, that might make for a good location for new upscale retail development?

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?

 

Yes, the Louis Vuitton store within a store is already in the Beachwood Saks.  Hugo Boss is contemplating doing something similar in the men's department of the store.  It would not push out the Louis Vuitton space.

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).

 

The only surviving independent part of TRW is the Automotive division. Its always been located in Michigan. The rest was folded into Northrop Gruman and into their offices. Northrop sold off the Automotive Division to a private equity firm who later spun it off.

 

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...

 

Going back to LV, not only did it change developers it also lost a couple of its original anchors before there was a shovel in the ground. I think this greatly imapacted their leasing strategy and hurt them when it came to luring apparel retailers. That's how it fell back on furniture and furnishings retailers, which is still LV's strength today. The original anchor was high end department store Jacobson's. It was to be a two story store. Sadly, Jake's went bankrupt before it could come to fruition. This led to Anthropologie pulling out of LV. Of course, they ended up going to Eton instead. I think the vibe and style of LV would've been completely different if Jake's had opened up or had been replaced by another upscale department store. Instead, it had to rely on an upscale Home Depot offshoot.

 

Ugh...well, I'm still skeptical about needing a new development at Acacia for all of those upscale retailers, though I do sort of understand the arguments for it.

 

Is there any open land anywhere else in the eastern suburbs, somewhat near 271, that might make for a good location for new upscale retail development?

 

My fear is that some of the missing retailers will end up part of a major development in the Twinsburg or Hudson areas. The money has spread down there. I think its only a matter of time before someone builds something upscale there to complement First & Main. Glimcher already tried to do it just as the economy crashed. It might take decades, but I think something big will be built down there in time. I'd rather see it on the Acacia land since that area is already heavily developed.

Is there any open land anywhere else in the eastern suburbs, somewhat near 271, that might make for a good location for new upscale retail development?

 

If the Beechmont Country Club ever shut down like Acacia you could develop a mirror to Eton across the street/south east of it.  Then the southeast quadrant of 271/Harvard is completely undeveloped.  I'd say the rest of the Chagrin Highlands but they have a weird fetish for parking lots and decorative ponds that would never let them fit even a mini mall on the land they have left on that side of the highway.

I'd put money that Stark would find a way of adding on to Eton before retailers start looking at Hudson/Twinsburg... East siders won't go down there (and this is spoken by a longtime Hudson resident, now living in Chagrin Falls...). At the same time, Hudsonites treated Beachwood Place like it was in Alaska... even though it's a close, or closer, than Summit Mall from them... 25 minutes...  I never got that...

 

For more space on east side... GGP built a streetscape at their Kenwood property in Cincy - just like Simon did at Summit, Westfield did at SouthPark and Glimcher did at Polaris... GGP could easily build out the front of BP and build a whole new wing/streetscape... add a parking deck - and there's your space... BP doesn't seem like the regional draw it should. Add that American Girl store and REI and some upscalers and you've got the draw.

 

Fleming's and Anthro were both on original leasing map of LV, if I recall. Both ended up at Eton. And why did Container Store get announced and then pull out - and hasn't revisited building, or have they? Borders La Place is the right size and it is quite visible from Cedar. J-B space at LV is the right size, too...

 

And as far as the Louis Vuitton store within a store. Have seen similar setups in other markets, though some are just counters/nooks. Ours in CLE just happens to be of the same look - and nearly same size - as the real Vuitton freestanding stores they were building a few years ago. However, in markets like Columbus and Detroit, they had - and still have - Vuitton stores within their Saks - and also built full-fledged freestanding stores.  In Detroit, it's even in the same mall.  Obviously, if store-within-a-stores were the ideal way of going to market - then there wouldn't be freestanding stores... They are not quite the same thing, not do they have the same cache'

 

 

For more space on east side... GGP built a streetscape at their Kenwood property in Cincy - just like Simon did at Summit, Westfield did at SouthPark and Glimcher did at Polaris... GGP could easily build out the front of BP and build a whole new wing/streetscape... add a parking deck - and there's your space... BP doesn't seem like the regional draw it should. Add that American Girl store and REI and some upscalers and you've got the draw.

 

 

 

 

 

I believe if that were to happen at Beachwood Place there will have to be quite a change of heart among residents of Beachwood and the city administriation since the last "major" expansion when Dillards was expanded and Nordstroms added.  If I recall correctly the owners of the mall at that time had to compromise considerably to implement the expansion as neighbors were very much opposed and the city very much tried to address their concerns.  That is one of the reasons you have those five a six houses (I imagine they are all rentals now) and buffer trees on Richmond between LaPlace and the drive off of Richmond into the mall.

And the plot thickens with the City of Lyndhurst offering to buy the land to sell to developers:

 

http://www.cleveland.com/lyndhurst-south-euclid/index.ssf/2012/08/city_of_lyndhurst_makes_purcha.html

And the plot thickens with the City of Lyndhurst offering to buy the land to sell to developers:

 

http://www.cleveland.com/lyndhurst-south-euclid/index.ssf/2012/08/city_of_lyndhurst_makes_purcha.html

 

It seems like the city had their shot with a proposal, but must have thought developers would make the best offers without their involvement.  It also seems like this proposal, despite a higher offer price, has a number of conditions that must be met, which is why it seemed that the conservation proposal was viewed favorably - they were willing to take it as is.

I hope they go with the Conservation groups proposal...  This mayors statements have shown just how shortsighted and boneheaded he is.  He treats this like it is their only option and doesnt seem to realize that redevelopment needs to be and is his best option moving forward (because even if they controlled the Acacia land, they are going to end up in the same spot eventually without a better plan in pace (somewht like what happens when highways are expanded into the outer burbs to relieve congestion)).  His type of short sighted thinking make me crazy. 

And the plot thickens with the City of Lyndhurst offering to buy the land to sell to developers:

 

http://www.cleveland.com/lyndhurst-south-euclid/index.ssf/2012/08/city_of_lyndhurst_makes_purcha.html

 

It seems like the city had their shot with a proposal, but must have thought developers would make the best offers without their involvement.  It also seems like this proposal, despite a higher offer price, has a number of conditions that must be met, which is why it seemed that the conservation proposal was viewed favorably - they were willing to take it as is.

 

Those are pretty standard conditions and my guess is the club is already aware of title history and if there is the potential for an environmental concerns, so this may not be an issue to them if they don't expect the due diligence to turn up an issues. 

Does anyone have any sense of split of opinion among Lyndurst residents?  I'm guessing a substantial number would much rather have the open space and lack of additional congestion than the tax money, but any guesses whether this is a majority?

My parents live there (a five minute walk to the course), and they openly loathe the idea of more retail, regardless of it being high end, with some concerns of low income housing as well.

 

 

It probably depends on the resident.  I wouldn't say that anyone is really urging more retail for the sake of having retail.  Rather, it is a question of whether the City can capitalize on tax revenue which a park will not *directly* bring.  The SE-L school district is facing more cuts and Lyndhurst prides itself on providing the very best City services (including sidewalk plowing and the ability of residents to put uncut, unbundled brush on their tree lawns for haul-away).

Does everyone really believe that an out of state Conservation group just happened to find this property - and a spare $15MM -  sitting around - and thought "let's buy it"?  Or could there potentially be much more to the story, including some details about where they got the $  - and why they might not really want the land developed - that might make supporters of this plan much less enthusiastic?

Even if a majority of residents oppose this, what role, if any, do citizens have in the decision-making process?  I mean if everything can move forward quickly before the next mayoral/council elections, do the residents have any say through any kind of a referendum?  It's not entirely clear to me what that area is zoned, but it appears to be residential like most of the rest of the city.

 

Also, somewhere I was reading something about the historic "Mayfield Country Estates" that were torn down to make way for Legacy Village?  Can anyone explain to me what these were and how big of a loss that was?  I don't have much of a memory of what that area looked like while TRW was still occupying the land.

Does everyone really believe that an out of state Conservation group just happened to find this property - and a spare $15MM -  sitting around - and thought "let's buy it"?  Or could there potentially be much more to the story, including some details about where they got the $  - and why they might not really want the land developed - that might make supporters of this plan much less enthusiastic?

 

I don't care unless they have some ulterior plan to sell it for retail development a decade from now.  I think I know what you're getting at, I read about it in the comments section of the article, and it doesn't concern me one bit.  What matters to me is that green space>retail, particularly in that part of the county.

Does everyone really believe that an out of state Conservation group just happened to find this property - and a spare $15MM -  sitting around - and thought "let's buy it"?  Or could there potentially be much more to the story, including some details about where they got the $  - and why they might not really want the land developed - that might make supporters of this plan much less enthusiastic?

 

Not really.  The head of the organization based outside of Washington DC is from Shaker Heights.  If it results in the city having to be more creative and not just relying on new development (only the kind that green fields can provide) thats all that matters to me.     

It probably depends on the resident.  I wouldn't say that anyone is really urging more retail for the sake of having retail.  Rather, it is a question of whether the City can capitalize on tax revenue which a park will not *directly* bring.  The SE-L school district is facing more cuts and Lyndhurst prides itself on providing the very best City services (including sidewalk plowing and the ability of residents to put uncut, unbundled brush on their tree lawns for haul-away).

 

But will it even be a park? The Conservation Fund has not laid out its plans which it why I haven't decided if I fully support them buying it or not. If they leave it as a golf course, the only residents who will gain from that will be in Three Village, Acacia Estates and Meadow Wood. Those who live across Mayfield, etc., gain little from that. A golf course is not much of an amenity these days (especially when there's a half dozen courses just minutes from Lyndhurst) and I don't see it as luring new home buyers to the city.

 

If the Conservation Group does turn it into a park, that could be a huge selling point and amenity for the city. Throw in a new YMCA or rec center (which the city could use desperately, they could even put the new SE-L library branch there) and some hiking trails and you have a real gem for the local residents. I would love to see that happen and I think it could be a real draw and help make the city more attractive.

 

You're certainly right that residents fear their services declining. I really wasn't that high on Lyndhurst when moving here (picked it for convenience, more than anything), but after living here, I've found that the services really are top notch. A terrific park would help ease the lack of new tax dollars. A golf course just doesn't really help out at all.

Does everyone really believe that an out of state Conservation group just happened to find this property - and a spare $15MM -  sitting around - and thought "let's buy it"?  Or could there potentially be much more to the story, including some details about where they got the $  - and why they might not really want the land developed - that might make supporters of this plan much less enthusiastic?

 

I don't care unless they have some ulterior plan to sell it for retail development a decade from now.  I think I know what you're getting at, I read about it in the comments section of the article, and it doesn't concern me one bit.  What matters to me is that green space>retail, particularly in that part of the county.

 

What are you getting at?  I do wonder if owners of Legacy and Beachwood Mall tossed a few donations to the conservation fund as those two certainly would not want this developed.

Clevelander17 - I saw the comments on the article, too. I'm talking about another rumored scenario entirely. Disingenuous or ulterior motives both potentially in play on that. Less so with other rumors.

Comments I'd read, of course, said a local individual was behind the $ - to protect a land investment... Keep the rumors and thoughts coming.

If the land ends up being developed I wonder how big of a development it would be. Would the whole plot be developed into something like Legacy or worse Golden Gate or could a more dense University Square sized development be built leaving the rest of the land as park land?

 

Clevelander17 - I saw the comments on the article, too. I'm talking about another scenario entirely. Disingenuous or ulterior motives both potentially in play...

 

Oh now you're going to have to spill it! ;)

Comments I'd read, of course, said a local individual was behind the $ - to protect a land investment... Keep the rumors and thoughts coming.

 

You too!  What is the other rumor?  Don't tease rumors and not tell them!

 

Anyone know how many acres that adjacent land owner has and what he paid for them with the intent to build homes? 

If the land ends up being developed I wonder how big of a development it would be. Would the whole plot be developed into something like Legacy or worse Golden Gate or could a more dense University Square sized development be built leaving the rest of the land as park land?

 

 

University Square has shown itself to be a failure.  I don't see anyone lining up to do that type of development.

Its a failure because the builder designed stores that faced a parking garage not the street. A vertical development like that could be successful if designed correctly

 

For those that missed - the comments section details one rumor... I think other rumors are on this board already, aren't they?

 

http://www.cleveland.com/lyndhurst-south-euclid/index.ssf/2012/08/city_of_lyndhurst_makes_purcha.html

 

 

Comments I'd read, of course, said a local individual was behind the $ - to protect a land investment... Keep the rumors and thoughts coming.

 

You too!  What is the other rumor?  Don't tease rumors and not tell them!

 

Anyone know how many acres that adjacent land owner has and what he paid for them with the intent to build homes? 

 

I assume you're talking about Mr. Aveni. That was a very controversial sale since he was a member of the club and a director. He ended up being involved in a bitter lawsuit that he claimed hurt his development. He tried to force the club to pay him $10 million in damages but lost in court. Aveni bought the land (17 acres) for $4 million. He recently re-started the development and is once again, building new homes there.

A terrific park would help ease the lack of new tax dollars.

 

Maybe.... which is why I was limiting the thought to only a "direct" tax benefit.  That said, parks benefit the most the people who can walk to them.  Not many Lyndhurst residents are within comfortable walking distance of Acacia.

A terrific park would help ease the lack of new tax dollars.

 

Maybe.... which is why I was limiting the thought to only a "direct" tax benefit.  That said, parks benefit the most the people who can walk to them.  Not many Lyndhurst residents are within comfortable walking distance of Acacia.

 

Very true. Although most people drive to the Metroparks. If the park is attractive enough, it becomes a destination. That's also why I'd build a rec center there and perhaps even the new library.

I've not heard anything substantive about a local individual or local developer being involved with the Conservancy..

I've not heard anything substantive about a local individual or local developer being involved with the Conservancy..

 

So it's pure hearsay by a your typical Cleveland.bomb commenter trying to stir up trouble.

 

What's the other rumor?  If you don't want to post it here, maybe you might be interested in shooting me a PM? :)

http://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/morning_call/2012/08/lyndhurst-tries-to-outbid-conservation.html

 

The Mayor of Lyndhurst wants this developed soooooooo badly.  A bidding war now on to try to push out the Conservation Fund.

 

Not scientific, but a personal friend and Acacia member says the majority of members are leaning towards a green space offer rather than development despite the lower $$ on the table.

 

As for rumors of potential nefarious goals of the conservation fund.....no way.  This is the same group that yanked North Bass Island from the plans of development...... and it is a true green, zero development, park project now.

Did the conservation group pay $15MM for north Bass Island?  It's the $ that makes this curious.

 

Either way, a smart city and developer would get some beautifal renderings of fancy shops, hotels, offices, restaurants and  lots of GREEN SPACE on that land out ASAP to show they can coexist on space.

I'm astonished they have so much money to throw around.

Did the conservation group pay $15MM for north Bass Island?  It's the $ that makes this curious.

 

What's this in reference to?

 

Either way, a smart city and developer would get some beautifal renderings of fancy shops, hotels, offices, restaurants and  lots of GREEN SPACE on that land out ASAP to show they can coexist on space.

 

Right a "smart" city that is looking to ignore residents' opinions and fool the general public would do such a thing.  It's almost like those in charge have already decided for everyone else what this space ought to be.  This is shaping up to be as unethical of a process as the Oakwood debacle.  How about listening to what the citizens want?

 

Why won't the mayor tell citizens who the developers are and what the developers' intentions would be?  Why is he waiting until after Acacia club members vote on the conservancy proposal?  Is there really $16 million on the table, or is he simply poisoning the well for a lower offer to simply get the land conservancy out of the way?  The article makes it sound as if the mayor doesn't even have a firm offer from any developer.  Perhaps this $16 million number may be imaginary.

 

Something's not right here.  The mayor needs to act more transparently.

 

Also, I have to say this, but I'm a little disgusted by some of the NIMBY comments in the Cleveland.bomb comments section from out-of-county folks who brag about abundant green space near them but don't mind about even more traffic congestion and diminishing green space in other areas.

Isn't Cedar-Richmond already the busiest intersection in Ohio?

Clevelander 17: North Bass Island reference was to "dergon darkhelm" post just above mine..

 

Perhaps a "smart" conservation group - wanting to make its case - should show some plans and give some commitments, too... What if this remains a golf course - and isn't turned into a park, etc... Are folks just taking them on their word?

 

As for NIMBY comments... if you mean me, 1) I DO live in Cuy County, my profile is old 2) I'm very much "IN my backyard, please!" - I love development - and am looking at this purely/selfishly from MY standpoint, my benefit if it gets built... there's no hiding that... see all my comments in the Retail News section.... (That my town would never, in a million year allow something like this, is a totally different story...) 

 

We all choose where we live. I built a house on the Ohio Turnpike a decade ago - and lived with that choice daily - highway noise - and to this day - haven't been able to re-sell it, etc... For those who live in the Richmond/Cedar area --- that was your choice... There's been a busy mall on that corner since the 1970s, Legacy there for a decade - and move west on Cedar and things are even older and more congested.  A busy Richmond/Cedar and the traffic and congestion that comes with it should be no surprise. And neither should more development (you don't think Beachwood Place won't expand at some near-future point - with or without Acacia developed? What happens then?

 

 

 

 

Isn't Cedar-Richmond already the busiest intersection in Ohio?

 

I'm not certain about that, though I'm certain it's one of the busiest in Northeast Ohio.  Is there a place that we can find such information?

http://www.noaca.org/trafficcounts.html

 

22850 go down Richmond per day.  Surprisingly, it does not have Cedar at that intersection.

 

31260 use Cedar Hill every day.

Cedar's numbers probably have a sizeable lead over Richmond.... due to the more often used entrances to the mall and LV plus the on and off ramps for 271

Perhaps a "smart" conservation group - wanting to make its case - should show some plans and give some commitments, too... What if this remains a golf course - and isn't turned into a park, etc... Are folks just taking them on their word?

 

A golf course wouldn't be optimal, but it would be better than more retail and more traffic congestion.

 

As for NIMBY comments... if you mean me, 1) I DO live in Cuy County, my profile is old 2) I'm very much "IN my backyard, please!" - I love development - and am looking at this purely/selfishly from MY standpoint, my benefit if it gets built... there's no hiding that... see all my comments in the Retail News section.... (That my town would never, in a million year allow something like this, is a totally different story...) 

 

I just take exception to your snide comment about having plenty of green space around you and advocating that the rest of us put up with daily headaches so that a few times a month you can eat at some fancy new restaurants that just have to be located in an already oversaturated part of town.  It's a bush league way of looking at the world.  This is exactly why we need regional planning that cuts a lot of this selfishness out of the equation.

 

We all choose where we live. I built a house on the Ohio Turnpike a decade ago - and lived with that choice daily - highway noise - and to this day - haven't been able to re-sell it, etc... For those who live in the Richmond/Cedar area --- that was your choice... There's been a busy mall on that corner since the 1970s, Legacy there for a decade - and move west on Cedar and things are even older and more congested.  A busy Richmond/Cedar and the traffic and congestion that comes with it should be no surprise. And neither should more development (you don't think Beachwood Place won't expand at some near-future point - with or without Acacia developed? What happens then?

 

Sorry, but I can't agree with this.  A decade and a half ago, neither Oakwood CC, TRW, nor Acacia CC were zoned for retail.  People bought homes near these places with absolutely no idea of what might happen to those clubs/businesses and what kinds of retail development might replace them.  I was young, but I do vaguely remember what Cedar-Richmond was like in the 1990s when only Beachwood Place and LaPlace were there.  Traffic wasn't great, but it wasn't nearly as bad as it is now.  To try to spin this around on them as if they should have known is simply ridiculous.  This isn't at all analogous to knowingly purchasing a home near the turnpike. 

 

There is an abundance of green space and wealth in the Chagrin Valley.  If there really is a need for more upscale retail in this region (which I think is debatable, despite claims of chains we're supposedly lacking), THAT'S where it should go, nearest to those that will be frequenting it.  And let Solon or Orange Village or wherever reap the hypothetical tax windfall from such a development.

We all choose where we live. I built a house on the Ohio Turnpike a decade ago - and lived with that choice daily - highway noise - and to this day - haven't been able to re-sell it, etc... For those who live in the Richmond/Cedar area --- that was your choice... There's been a busy mall on that corner since the 1970s, Legacy there for a decade - and move west on Cedar and things are even older and more congested.  A busy Richmond/Cedar and the traffic and congestion that comes with it should be no surprise. And neither should more development (you don't think Beachwood Place won't expand at some near-future point - with or without Acacia developed? What happens then?

 

Wait, you're comparing building a house "on the Ohio Turnpike" to developers redeveloping a golf course after people have lived in the area for years (University Heights and the northwestern portion of Beachwood was mostly developed in the 1930s, 1940s, and 1950s and the rest of Beachwood was mostly developed in the 1970s)?  Sorry, but that argument is a major fail.

Anyone not wanting something built on the Acacia land should look no further than your congresswoman, Marcia Fudge, as one of the reasons - as well as adjaceny to other shoppping - this land is "prime" She's the one, as Mayor of Warrensville Heights, who helped kill Harvard/271 as a potential location to house some of the major retailers wanting into the Cleveland market.  Those retailers want to be on the east side. They, preferably, want to be visible to 271. And, they need stores of a certain size, near other key retailers.  But when she pushed legislation to keep even modestly-large stores out of Harvard Park ("big box" is a four letter word - and doesn't define these kinds stores...) those retailers have to look elsewhere... Some (IKEA), were once interested in Harvard/271... This land likely won't interest them, but I know others already interested... and these would be major regional draws and aren't allowed to go to Harvard/271 due to zoning.

 

NOT developing this land - and reaping the tax benefits that come with it and offering additional amenities to CLE residents and businesses would the real "major fail" jam40jeff notes above.

 

 

"A decade and a half ago, neither Oakwood CC, TRW, nor Acacia CC were zoned for retail.  People bought homes near these places with absolutely no idea of what might happen to those clubs/businesses and what kinds of retail development might replace them"

 

Residents voted and/or elected officials made these decisions, right?

"A decade and a half ago, neither Oakwood CC, TRW, nor Acacia CC were zoned for retail.  People bought homes near these places with absolutely no idea of what might happen to those clubs/businesses and what kinds of retail development might replace them"

 

Residents voted and/or elected officials made these decisions, right?

 

To some degree, yes.  I wouldn't say that the developer in either case (Oakwood or TRW) was  entirely honest in how they presented these projects to the local governments and citizens.  Nor would I say that the process was very democratic because both developments are near the borders of other suburbs and residents in these suburbs had/will have their lives significantly impacted by these developments without getting any kind of say in the process...all because of a few imaginary lines drawn on a map almost a century ago.

 

In regards to Harvard Park, the interesting thing about that entire area is that it is the meeting point of three or four different jurisdictions.  Not only is there still a decent chunk of undeveloped land over there, but just because one of those jurisdictions has restrictions about a certain type of retail doesn't mean that the others couldn't welcome that retail.  I do think it's interesting to consider that even before Ahuja was built, or Eaton relocated to that area, that Beachwood never took the opportunity to welcome whichever retailers you think that this region needs so badly.  They realized--correctly--that such land can and should be put to better use.  If Lyndhurst insists on developing Acacia, they should do something more creative with it than build more retail (even if it's supposedly high end retail) like Beachwood did with its portion of Chagrin Highlands land.  Even if that means waiting until the right opportunity comes along.

 

Let me also throw this out there.  If Lyndhurst residents want a park there, then the Cleveland Metroparks should be brought to the table.  After all, Lyndhurst residents are paying for parks in places like Mayfield Village, Hunting Valley, and Solon, there's no reason why the favor can't be returned.

^ Under the Chagrin Highlands master plan, those rules on retail (Harvard Park is in Warrensville) and general zoning apply to the entire development. I don't  believe Jacobs can change that. Not unless all five affected municipalities approve and good luck getting that to happen. I think it's pretty much written in stone unless Cleveland, etc change their stances.

 

Getting back on topic, I'm still confused as to what Conservation Fund plans to do with Acacia. One reason I'm not anti-development on this is that the land is already developed. The trees are mostly gone and who knows what pesticides and chemicals the club has used over the years. This is not ready made park land. It's not a pristine wooded nature filled property. That was the Blossom Estate. The fund should've stepped in there as that truly was a preserve. Acacia? Not so much. Sure, a park can be a big green field but that's not what people think of when it comes to a park. They think of the Metroparks. How can the Conservation Fund pull that off?

^

 

The conservation fund doesn't need to be short term focused.  As a nonprofit their primary goal is conservation and they're not beholden to residents.  They can take all the time they want.  However, these sorts of groups don't hang onto properties; they acquire to save them from development, and then work with some local entity to create a plan and then sell the land to that entity.  Obviously it won't be Lyndhurst, or at least not in the near term.

 

Also, there is plenty that can be done to work towards making a golf course into a park. If soil samples come back with excessive chemical concentrations it's nothing a little time and basic remediation efforts couldn't fix.  Since they're not a strictly environmental conservation organization there are a lot more possibilities for active recreation facilities (sans large buildings) that could go on the property.  Additionally a well cultured meadow environment is quite appealing and could be developed on part of the property relatively quickly.

^

 

The conservation fund doesn't need to be short term focused.  As a nonprofit their primary goal is conservation and they're not beholden to residents.  They can take all the time they want.  However, these sorts of groups don't hang onto properties; they acquire to save them from development, and then work with some local entity to create a plan and then sell the land to that entity.  Obviously it won't be Lyndhurst, or at least not in the near term.

 

 

+1 - That's what happened on North Bass. (I'm not an expert on on the NBI deal, but my understanding was $6mil put up for purchasing the property by the Conservation Fund, then an agreement with the State of Ohio to turn it into a State Park.

 

The Acacia site if sold to the Conservation Fund (and my shareholder friend just hit balls yesterday....said it looks like a done deal ......members are going around offerring to help employees find new jobs) they woulld look for some governmental partner. It ain't gonna be Lyndhurst with current leadership. Maybe the County (ala Wendy Park) or the Metroparks?

 

 

OK -- thought I should find some links since I'm throwing numbers around loosely:

http://www.nps.gov/ncrc/programs/lwcf/lwcf_case_studies.pdf

 

North Bass Island Acquisition, Ohio

LWCF Funding Assistance $6,000,000

 

The Ohio Department of Natural Resources received the

largest single-site state LWCF grant in the 40-year

history of the program to protect North Bass Island in

Ottawa County, the last large, undeveloped island on

Lake Erie. The $6 million LWCF grant will be used to

acquire approximately 357 acres. Recreation

development on the island will include campgrounds,

picnic areas, swimming, boating and fishing facilities,

trails, hunting and natural areas.

http://www.ohiodnr.com/Coastal_Main_Menu/PublicAccess/Ot_NBI_SP/tabid/22619/Default.aspx

The public areas on North Bass Island were purchased with state funds and grants from the Department of the Interior Land and Water Conservation Fund and the Coastal and Estuarine Land Conservation Program, which is now administered by the ODNR Office of Coastal Management.