Fashion Valley, developed by Ernest W. Hahn, opened in 1969, in part on the former site of the baseball stadium called Westgate Park. Aimed to be the leading shopping center in the San Diego region, it boasted four anchors, The Broadway, JCPenney, J.W. Robinson's and Buffum's. For several years it competed with the neighboring Mission Valley Center. Since its opening, the mall has undergone several expansions and changes. The first in August 1981 added Nordstrom and Neiman Marcus, establishing Fashion Valley as the fashion leader in the valley. Following this redevelopment, in 1991, Buffum's closed, and their location was reopened in 1992 by upscale specialty San Franciscodepartment store I. Magnin. However, the upscale company eventually closed all stores in the mid-90s, and the Fashion Valley location was replaced by Saks Fifth Avenue in 1995. Robinson's became a Robinsons-May in 1993, while The Broadway was purchased by Macy's in 1996. Due to underperformance, Saks Fifth Avenue closed its Fashion Valley location on July 17, 2010. After the closing of Saks Fifth Avenue, the space was replaced with Forever 21. In October 1997, Gene Kemp led a $110 million renovation project, enlarging the Macy's, Nordstrom and Robinsons-May stores. It increased the mall size to, 200 stores, and added 5 parking structures to accommodate 8,000 cars. In 2001, the owner of the property, Lend Lease Prime Property Fund, brought in Simon Property Group as half-owner and manager of the property. Due to the merger of May Department Stores and Federated Department Stores in 2006, Robinsons-May shuttered their store in March of that year, and the location was replaced by San Diego's first Bloomingdale's department store on November 18, 2006.
Legal issues
Fashion Valley Mall was involved in a legal case involving the quasi-public nature of some private property. The printers union wanted to distribute leaflets in the mall encouraging patrons to boycott Robinsons-May, because Robinsons-May was an advertiser in the San Diego newspaper with which the printers union was negotiating. The court held that this activity was protected and allowed on the property, even though the action was contrary to the business interests of the targeted tenant. The decision is based on article 1section 2 of the California Constitution.
