No roof: cause for Old Orchard & Oakbrook success? (Chicago: appliances, home)

[chet everett]

There are all kinds of very thorough studies of what factors have been key in the success of malls like Oakbrook Center in Oak Brook and Old Orchard in Skokie. Demographics is certainly a big part of who is mostly likely to spend money at the mall, but factors of how the management has worked with higher level personnel from the various merchants is part of what happens "behind the scenes" that is less well known. Decades ago the folks who ran "boutique style" department stores like Bonwitt Teller did things like hooking a perfume dispenser to the revolving door so passers by would be drawn to scent. More recently the same space in Oakbrook Center that now houses Crate & Barrel was a key part of the company's strategy to sell more high end patio / outdoor space by displaying it on the mall facing balcony. Across the grassy central area of the mall there is a true showcase Microsoft Store diagonally from a Tesla store and a showroom for the home fitness spin device / service Peloton -- each of these things are setting a tone for the product as much as trying to actually "sell stuff".

Without getting too far into why it is so much harder to do this in enclosed malls I would touch upon the rather subtle ways that nicer luxury car showrooms are furnished in more upscale materials than a typical mass market brand . The funny thing is that many of the folks who own Lexus or Acura dealerships also have "regular" Toyota or Honda showrooms and the higher ups from BOTH SIDES of the corporate side have specific guidelines about creating a consistent "brand experience".

The sad mess of most "regular" enclosed malls running into more and more difficulty has LOTS to do with how little disposable cash consumers, of ALL INCOMES, choose to spend on non-distinctive goods -- things that are / have become commodities are easy enough to buy at LOTS of alternative retail locations from warehouse clubs to discount big box stores to online...

[jvr789]

Additionally, it is much more expensive to heat/cool and maintain an enclosed mall vs. an open-air center. Retailers can absorb these extra operating costs if sales volumes are high enough. Alternatively if retail sales are being eroded (as Chet said all the various retail options out there now, including online) the retailer may decide to locate in an open-air center vs. the enclosed mall b/c the costs to be in the open-air center are lower and they can sustain themselves in that location. They call this "occupancy cost" and it is basically a function of rent costs/tenant sales.

[wjj]

Originally Posted by MillennialUrbanist

Deer Park Mall looks and feels more like a glorified strip mall than a "proper" mall, indoor or outdoor. A true mall, in my definition, has to have its shopping areas separate from its parking lots or garages. If you can drive right up to the store entrances, it's a strip mall. (The biggest irony is one of its stores: The Walking Company, located in one of the least pedestrian-friendly suburbs.) Then again, perhaps it's why Deer Park Mall is doing so well; it's surrounding area is extremely auto-centric.

I agree, but think that a place like Deer Park is a mall, just a different kind of mall. I find that being to drive up, park in front of a store, and pop in and out in a few minutes is far more attractive than having to park away from a traditional mall like Woodfield on a parking deck or huge parking lot and have to schlep through the mall just to get to the store I want to visit. I do all my shopping browsing online and have no need or desire to cruise a mall just to see what is available. I do not look at Deer Park as a glorified strip mall. I look at it as a far more convenient "traditional" mall. We have not been to Woodfield in years.

[MillennialUrbanist]

Originally Posted by wjj

I agree, but think that a place like Deer Park is a mall, just a different kind of mall. I find that being to drive up, park in front of a store, and pop in and out in a few minutes is far more attractive than having to park away from a traditional mall like Woodfield on a parking deck or huge parking lot and have to schlep through the mall just to get to the store I want to visit. I do all my shopping browsing online and have no need or desire to cruise a mall just to see what is available. I do not look at Deer Park as a glorified strip mall. I look at it as a far more convenient "traditional" mall. We have not been to Woodfield in years.

As a dude, my appreciation of "recreational" shopping is very, very limited. Unless it's Home Depot or a military surplus store . But it seems like traditional malls create a shopping experience: come, wander, browse, shop, eat, shop again, leave. Malls like Deer Park are more like like standalone stores that happen to be located together, each with a single function: shop. I suppose it's not a stretch of imagination that a lot of people prefer the latter. Especially those who engage in reverse showrooming: research online, then buy at a store without browsing. But just saying.

[CGab]

Originally Posted by noid_1985

If I'm not mistaken River Oaks in Calumet City was an "open air" mall, all three were developed by the same company. Demographics of the suburbs financially and racially are factors on why River Oaks isn't doing as well compared to oakbrook and old orchard. Most south suburbanites that I know much rather drive to Orland or Oak Lawn for better/ more shopping options.

This exactly! It mainly has to do with demographics. Oak Brook is surrounded by upper class communities such as Oak Brook, Burr Ridge and Hinsdale. Where as River Oaks is surrounded mainly by lower income towns. If the money isn't there to spend, then the stores can not succeed, especially high end stores.


I also believe as another poster stated, an outdoor mall has no place in the Midwest; however, that doesn't stop Oak Brook from flourishing!

[edsg25]

Originally Posted by wjj

I agree, but think that a place like Deer Park is a mall, just a different kind of mall. I find that being to drive up, park in front of a store, and pop in and out in a few minutes is far more attractive than having to park away from a traditional mall like Woodfield on a parking deck or huge parking lot and have to schlep through the mall just to get to the store I want to visit. I do all my shopping browsing online and have no need or desire to cruise a mall just to see what is available. I do not look at Deer Park as a glorified strip mall. I look at it as a far more convenient "traditional" mall. We have not been to Woodfield in years.

It's not; what it is is a lifestyle center. That said, It was unfortunately laid out like a strip mall with its incredibly long string of stores. Unfortunately we don't have in the Chicago area the type of life style centers you find in places like California and Florida where there is an attempt to create a real streetscape with stores facing each other from across the street. Places like Santa Row (San Jose), The Grove (LA), and Mizner Park (Boca Raton) run rings around the Chicagoland lifestyle centers. Of course, I realize that climate in California and Florida make this more practical.

[edsg25]

Originally Posted by CGab

This exactly! It mainly has to do with demographics. Oak Brook is surrounded by upper class communities such as Oak Brook, Burr Ridge and Hinsdale. Where as River Oaks is surrounded mainly by lower income towns. If the money isn't there to spend, then the stores can not succeed, especially high end stores.


I also believe as another poster stated, an outdoor mall has no place in the Midwest; however, that doesn't stop Oak Brook from flourishing!

Old Orchard does pretty darned well also.

[wjj]

Originally Posted by edsg25

It's not; what it is is a lifestyle center. That said, It was unfortunately laid out like a strip mall with its incredibly long string of stores. Unfortunately we don't have in the Chicago area the type of life style centers you find in places like California and Florida where there is an attempt to create a real streetscape with stores facing each other from across the street. Places like Santa Row (San Jose), The Grove (LA), and Mizner Park (Boca Raton) run rings around the Chicagoland lifestyle centers. Of course, I realize that climate in California and Florida make this more practical.

Agree. We have a second home in SWFL and places like Coconut Point in Estero FL (between Fort Myers and Naples) are in an entirely different league than any mall or lifestyle center around Chicago. Same for Gulf Coast Town Center, (also in Estero) which has a younger vibe and is not as high end given its proximity to FGCU (Dunk City!). But they are so large that they are not walkable beyond their core sections. You have to drive or take a trolley to get around the entire center.

[MillennialUrbanist]

Originally Posted by edsg25

It's not; what it is is a lifestyle center. That said, It was unfortunately laid out like a strip mall with its incredibly long string of stores. Unfortunately we don't have in the Chicago area the type of life style centers you find in places like California and Florida where there is an attempt to create a real streetscape with stores facing each other from across the street. Places like Santa Row (San Jose), The Grove (LA), and Mizner Park (Boca Raton) run rings around the Chicagoland lifestyle centers. Of course, I realize that climate in California and Florida make this more practical.

Chicago does have something like that: Randhurst Mall 2.0 (my way of referring to the Randhurst Mall after it was torn down and rebuilt in 2012). It's an outdoor mall that lets you drive up right to stores, but it's constructed like a city street with two-story buildings facing each other, rather than a strip mall with one-story buildings at the end of a parking lot. It doesn't look city-like at all; its mall aspect is more transparent than plate glass. Is this is what most "lifestyle centers" are like?

Randhurst Mall 1.0, on the other hand, was a decades-old traditional indoor mall. With two floors of shopping, balconies on the second floor, and an ornate atrium with a carousel in it. Very similar to the Lincolnwood Mall.

[edsg25]

Originally Posted by MillennialUrbanist

Chicago does have something like that: Randhurst Mall 2.0 (my way of referring to the Randhurst Mall after it was torn down and rebuilt in 2012). It's an outdoor mall that lets you drive up right to stores, but it's constructed like a city street with two-story buildings facing each other, rather than a strip mall with one-story buildings at the end of a parking lot. It doesn't look city-like at all; its mall aspect is more transparent than plate glass. Is this is what most "lifestyle centers" are like?

Randhurst Mall 1.0, on the other hand, was a decades-old traditional indoor mall. With two floors of shopping, balconies on the second floor, and an ornate atrium with a carousel in it. Very similar to the Lincolnwood Mall.

I find Randhurst Village to be a major disappointment. Yes, it does have streets running through it, but the buildings that line them have no defined architectural style. And RV was done on the cheap....they were originally going to have residences above the stores, but that was dropped. Meanwhile, the range of stores is not very exciting and the center is dead most of the time, although Costco does a good business. Carsons (the only store that was always at Randhurst) does have a good store there now.

I wouldn't classify Randhurst as a "lifestyle center" because it really doesn't have that range of upscale merchants that one finds at such a venue.