IBJNews

A year later, Circle Centre Nordstrom vacancy lingers

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

Without a rapid-fire lease deal and renovation, the former Nordstrom anchor space at Circle Centre mall will sit idle for a second holiday shopping season.

The high-end department store chain closed the 210,000-square-foot downtown store in July 2011. Nordstrom opened with the mall in 1995, helping ensure the success of the publicly financed project.

Nordstrom Nordstrom signs that gave Circle Centre an upscale air came down almost a year ago. Simon still is working on a complicated deal to replace the massive department store. (IBJ file photo)

The more general-audience-oriented department store chain Macy’s remains the odds-on favorite to replace Nordstrom, though it would take only a portion of the available space, industry sources said. Three or four national restaurant concepts would split the remainder.

The mall’s second anchor, Carson Pirie Scott, renewed its lease last year after property manager Simon Property Group Inc. agreed to concessions to prevent another big setback for the mall.

Simon has been showing prospective tenants for the Nordstrom space a site plan that includes an unnamed department store at the northwest corner of Meridian and Georgia streets and restaurants along Maryland Street west of Meridian.

If Simon can land a department store, its challenge will turn to the logistics of dividing the space for customer access and to accommodate mechanicals and loading docks, industry sources said. Recruiting restaurant concepts interested in joining the downtown mix is the easy part.

“We’re working hard on it,” said Simon spokesman Les Morris, who said the company is holding off on an announcement until lease deals are finalized for the Nordstrom space. “I’ve seen some good proposals.”

Replacing Nordstrom has been tricky since the space is so large and anchor stores these days are taking smaller spaces. The population density and household incomes for the area surrounding the mall also make it a tough sell because the numbers don’t reflect Circle Centre’s reliance on convention visitors. And the mall isn’t among the highest performers in Simon’s portfolio.

Excluding the Nordstrom space, Circle Centre mall in 2011 saw its occupancy rate for the first three floors fall to 91 percent from 93 percent, and sales per square foot decline to $336 from $341, according to an annual report Simon prepares for city officials.

That’s well below the more than $400 average for Simon malls. The company blamed a shortened Indiana Pacers season and lower attendance at Indianapolis Colts games for the decline.

The mall earned $8.8 million on revenue of $22 million, a decrease of $381,000 that Simon blamed on “a decrease in minimum rent and reimbursements in the Carson Pirie Scott renewal.”

The mall in 2011 renewed leases with Banana Republic, Aeropostale, Brookstone and Yankee Candle and added Teavana, Francesca’s Collections, California Pizza Kitchen, Dairy Queen and Brown Mackie College—which took 25,000 square feet on the mall’s vacancy-plagued fourth floor. (The deal pushed the mall’s overall occupancy to 91 percent, up from 85 percent.)

But 2012 has brought a new round of setbacks: The teen fashion chain Hollister closed its store near the entrance to the former Nordstrom; skin-care chain Origins closed its location next to The Finish Line; and space that housed holiday season pop-up shops for Vera Bradley and Love Sac next to the Carson Pirie Scott mall entrance remain vacant.

circle-centre-table.gifSimon offered an update on the search for a Nordstrom replacement in the May 11 report.

“This is an opportunity to find a tenant or tenants that even better suit the Circle Centre shopper and will complement the entire downtown area,” mall management noted. “There has been strong interest in this location due to the vibrancy of Indianapolis’ core and we look forward to making an announcement in the near future.”

Many retail observers figured Nordstrom eventually would abandon its downtown store after the chain added a second Indianapolis location in 2008, at The Fashion Mall at Keystone. The market is too small to support two Nordstrom stores, which tend to cater toward repeat upscale customers, not visitors.

The city built the Circle Centre store for Nordstrom at no upfront cost to the retailer and likely would offer a similar incentive deal for a replacement.

“City officials have talked internally about scenarios and ideas, but the city has not formally engaged in negotiations with another tenant,” Deputy Mayor Michael Huber said. “We’d like to get a new tenant in there, the sooner the better.”

Huber said it’s too early to discuss the proposed layout of the space, which calls for restaurants along Maryland Street and not the new pedestrian streetscape of Georgia Street, which the city envisioned as a haven for outdoor dining.

The first priority is landing an anchor tenant.

“We’re not pushing for restaurants on Georgia Street, but that could change if we figure out a way to make it happen,” Huber said. “Given the substantial investment the city has made, we want to make sure it’s successful and the new tenant works with Georgia Street.”

Simon’s plans for restaurants along Maryland make sense from both a structural and practical standpoint, said Steve Delaney, a principal in locally based Sitehawk Retail Real Estate.

For starters, the multistory portion of the former Nordstrom and its escalators are to the south. Restaurants also prefer Maryland Street to Georgia Street.

“It’s a little closer to the daytime population and the middle of the mall,” Delaney said. “Aesthetically, go south. But from an operational standpoint, they’d prefer to be north.”

Scot Courtney, director of retail services in the local office of Lee & Associates, isn’t buying it.

“Georgia Street is now set up for restaurants,” he said a few weeks ago at a retail leasing event in Las Vegas. “You can’t plan it out any better.”

The city owns the land under Circle Centre and its parking garages and paid more than half the cost of building the mall. Most of the mall structure itself is leased by a partnership of 20 mostly local companies, including Simon, which collects fees for management and leasing.•

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. liek the rest of America

  2. These quaint,obsessed musings by the stalkers are certainly entertaining, but I'm trying to figure out what, if anything, all the yelping below has to do with Zak Brown.

  3. It's evident that Moffett was pushing the right buttons and corporate America is now trying to squash him. He just wanted to withdraw the free pilot services provided to the company by the pilots to try and put some pressure on a company that has not been interested in negotiating a contract in over 5 years. The company does not provide a contract because not having one has saved them a bundle of money. Shame on any Republic pilots not standing behind their union leader just because things are getting tough, can you not see such strategic moves by the company as putting the last union president in a corporate position and into THEIR pocket. Do you really believe the last union president is so appalled at the attempts by Moffett, do you not remember his oppositions to the company? We stood behind him. It has been proven over and over again for thousands of years without fail, a man cannot serve two masters. Anyone that believes people vote contrary to their paycheck and livelihood deserve to be taken advantage of, the recent statements by the former union president are laughable as he denounces the current union president from his new corporate position. Have you ever seen a drafted sports player score points for his previous team, it cannot be done, he is not on the pilots side anymore, he gets his money a different way now than you and I do, and he should not be allowed to remain on the seniority list. A drafted player brings strength, credibility, tactical knowledge, and a strategic advantage to his NEW team, he would not be drafted or paid were it otherwise. We are all forced to choose only one side to play for and support, not doing so has many references in life such as insider trading and shaving points, all illegal for good reason. This basic fact is why corporate moguls, scientist, and engineers all sign non-discloser agreements and non-compete clauses, as protection in case they are lured into switching sides as our former union president has done. No NFL coach ever drafted a player so that both teams could benefit and better understand each other, they are recruited to win the game against that former team, period. Likewise the company does not recruit the former union president by accident or mutual understanding, its strategy. Don't confuse playing the game with good sportsman-like conduct in support of common business and prosperity goals, with the requirement to only play for one side. Good men we all love and favor fall subject to this manipulation, often without their knowledge, and it is not a betrayal of their friendship to oppose them when they switch sides. If we did not love and trust them, they would not have been chosen and lured to the other side in the first place. The deception by the drafted player is not made at a conscious level, it's just human nature and it's all about money and power which corrupts our ability to be objective and loyal to two masters. This is why our court system created the defense attorney, and why our military created counter intelligence. Its strategy and its propaganda, and it works, and that's why the "powers to be" manipulate the chess pieces by sometimes changing their colors. Some players know they are being manipulated when their color is changed, but it brings them more money and power so they do not care. The rest have good intentions but do not even realize they are being manipulated. This tactic is also known by another name, Divide and Conquer. In battle sending an imperfect message with an imperfect team is obviously not ideal, but it's still being sent by YOUR team, your union leader, a leader that has common goals and common rewards with you, they are the best, because we have elected them to do a job for us. If you are not backing Moffett but believing the spin by those that have recently switched sides, you are taking food out of your own mouth. Showing unity and backing an imperfect situation still results in taking just as much ground, it's about unity and bargaining power. It's not necessary to wait around for that perfect attack because it will never come, the company will spin and attempt to destroy anyone that gets in their way. Ultimately it's not about any specific attack anyway, ASAP or whatever it makes no difference, it is and always has been only about power. If this company cared about safety it would not build pairings with 8 hour overnights, come on, are you that naive? Besides, do you really think Hoffa cares, no, he got a call from corporate America and was squeezed into denouncing Moffett. If he didn't they would spin the safety card against him and the Teamsters National with implication for truckers, future contracts, insurance rates etc...saying something like the Teamsters use safety as a bargaining chip, blah blah blah... Do you really think any pilot is going to do something unsafe for the contract, absolutely not, the only ones threatening safety here is the company with reduced rest, fatigue, and poverty. Do you not find it odd that Hoffa and the Teamsters are opposing a Teamster president publicly? Would the Teamsters National not normally support and work with one of their own? Why did they not sit down and help him strategize, correct any mistakes, and charge ahead? Would the Teamsters National not normally support and leverage a contract for all those pilots that have been paying Teamster dues, isn't that why we have all been paying Teamster dues in the first place? I sure haven't been paying dues so that the Teamsters National could come along and write this kind of an article undercutting our union leader and our unity. Whose side is the Teamsters National really on, it's obviously not the Republic pilots side.

  4. No matter what Moffatt does the company is going to spin it like he is the terrorist and brainwash people like you into believing it, wake up, back your players that are trying to change things for you and your livelihood. Where has Hoffa been for the last 6 years, except collecting our dues. Seriously, do you really think an FO going for upgrade, signed off by a checkairman ready for the upgrade, who then fails, is not even capable of returning as a First Officer.

  5. whoa!

ADVERTISEMENT