Northbrook Court is owned by Brookfield Properties, a subsidiary of Brookfield Asset Management. Brookfield is one of the largest real estate investment firms in the world, managing billions in assets across retail, office, and mixed-use developments. They acquired Northbrook Court in 2018 as part of their $15 billion takeover of General Growth Properties (GGP), the mall’s previous owner. At the time, being part of a global real estate powerhouse may have seemed like a positive development. Seven years later, the reality has been much different.
With early voting in Northbrook’s municipal election beginning Monday, March 17 at 9:00 AM at Village Hall, Northbrook Court has emerged as one of the defining issues of this election. Both the Northbrook Caucus and Northbrook Focused candidates have addressed the mall’s future in their platforms, albeit with differing levels of emphasis and specificity. Their full positions can be found here: https://engagenorthbrook.com/2025-election-information.
The Northbrook Caucus has framed Northbrook Court’s redevelopment as a top priority, emphasizing the village’s past work with Brookfield Properties and its commitment to ongoing engagement with the developer. Their platform expresses confidence that redevelopment will gain momentum as interest rates fall and highlights examples of interim uses for the mall space, including the February Lucid pop-up.
Northbrook Focused, while also recognizing Northbrook Court’s significance, takes a more cautious approach, noting that the property remains fully owned by Brookfield and that actual redevelopment depends on the decisions of the current owner. Their platform prioritizes a structured and transparent development process, consistent communication with Brookfield, and policies that promote responsible investment.
Northbrook Court has been a persistent challenge since 2018, when the village board first approved a large-scale redevelopment of the aging mall. Yet, seven years later, the only tangible changes are the demolition of the former Macy’s site and a continued loss of tenants—including Apple, whose recent closure effectively puts the final nail in the coffin of the current mall.
The Caucus’ specific inclusion of the Lucid pop-up in their platform further illustrates the mall’s current reality. While any activity at Northbrook Court is arguably better than none, this event—by my observation—consisted of two Lucid vehicles placed on opposite sides of the mall, with a QR code discreetly affixed to a back window of one. There was no signage, no branding, and no indication that this was a serious marketing effort. If this is being held up as a meaningful example of making use of the space, it only reinforces how far Northbrook Court has fallen.
For all the debate about Northbrook Court, what’s missing is progress. The Village Board has approved two major incentive packages in an effort to kickstart redevelopment, yet Brookfield has continued to stall. The latest chapter in this ongoing saga played out at the March 11, 2025, Village Board meeting, where Brookfield once again requested more flexibility—this time, to shift the project’s phasing. What followed was a meeting that encapsulated the broader issue: a redevelopment effort stuck in limbo, a village board with no real leverage, and a developer that seems either unable or unwilling to act.
At the same time, while the Village Board must own its role in Northbrook’s reputation as a difficult place to build—and acknowledge that behind-the-scenes factors may have affected progress—it is not solely to blame for the state of Northbrook Court. If anything, its approval of two substantial incentive packages signals a clear commitment to revitalization. Could a different board, with more creativity or experience, have navigated this situation more effectively? Possibly. But it is just as—if not more—likely that another board could have mismanaged the situation entirely, leaving the village in an even worse position.
This piece will first examine what transpired at the March 11 meeting before stepping back to explore the history of Northbrook Court—from its rise to its decline—and, ultimately, what the future may hold.
March 11, 2025: The Latest Chapter in a Stalled Redevelopment
The Northbrook Village Board and Plan Commission convened a joint session on March 11, 2025, after Brookfield Properties submitted a request in February seeking approval to begin residential construction before retail. The Village President fast-tracked this meeting, signaling the urgency of the issue.
The latest request from Brookfield Properties—one of multiple revisions and extensions sought since the 2018 redevelopment plan—came via representatives Paul Shadle (DLA Piper) and Adam Tritt (Chief Development Officer). Brookfield justified the request by citing macroeconomic uncertainty, high interest rates, and a struggling luxury retail market, arguing that these factors made the project more feasible overall if they had flexibility in the order of operations.
The proposal did not alter the overall scope of the most recently agreed-upon redevelopment but rather the sequence in which it would unfold—framing it as a necessary step to create more flexibility for Brookfield to make progress. In reality, it did not present the Board with much of a choice: approve the request with the hope that Brookfield would finally make progress, or deny it with near certainty that nothing would continue to happen. The request required no financial commitment from the village, but the discussion underscored the stark reality of the situation: while the village retains some control through approvals and incentives, it has little ability to force Brookfield to act—and even less reason to believe meaningful progress is imminent.
Under the 2023 agreement, Northbrook committed $90M in financial incentives—including Tax Increment Financing (TIF, a financing tool that captures the increase in property tax revenue generated by redevelopment and reinvests it into the project), business district funds, and sales tax financing—to spur high-end retail development. The deal was structured to limit financial exposure for the village: Brookfield would only receive funding if they met key milestones, including securing building permits, obtaining engineering approvals, and—most importantly—signing leases for at least 50% of the planned retail space.
Northbrook Court’s economic impact was undeniable—at its peak, it generated well over $3M in annual sales tax revenue, with 94% of that coming from shoppers outside of Northbrook. While this influx of revenue was a windfall for local residents, it also represented a structural risk to the village budget since Northbrook alone could not sustain the mall. The village’s financial commitment reflects this urgency, but those protections only matter if Brookfield follows through. If they fail to meet their benchmarks, Northbrook is left with no progress, and potentially years of further stagnation while waiting for a new developer.
Brookfield argued that allowing residential construction to begin first would actually make retail development more viable, claiming that starting with housing would create momentum and attract commercial tenants later. But when pressed for specifics, they had no answers. When asked for a clear retail timeline, Tritt, perhaps attempting humor, shrugged off repeated calls for an answer, saying, “I left my crystal ball at the office.” If it was meant to lighten the mood, it failed. Instead, it underscored Brookfield’s continued vagueness on when—or if—real progress will begin.
Even more concerning was Brookfield’s admission that they had not even begun marketing the retail spaces—claiming they didn’t want to be “presumptive” about approval for this request. This reinforced a now-familiar pattern: a company that repeatedly asks for more flexibility while demonstrating no urgency in demonstrating actual progress. If Brookfield hasn’t spent the last two years actively securing potential tenants, what exactly have they been doing?
Despite these vague answers, no one at the meeting pressed them for real commitments or pushed back on their lack of urgency—leaving the village with more questions than answers and no clear path forward.
Throughout the meeting, trustees and plan commissioners walked a fine line—attempting to appear firm while avoiding any direct confrontation with Brookfield. Most questions centered on when the public might see tangible progress, rather than demanding clear commitments or accountability. It was as if they recognized the futility of the exercise but still felt compelled to go through the motions.
Even if the Board had no real leverage, a stronger stance—at least to reinforce public confidence—would have been warranted. Yet no trustee pushed Brookfield to provide a firm explanation for the continued delays. The most obvious question—what, exactly, has Brookfield been doing since signing the agreement in 2023?—was left unasked.
It's possible that Brookfield had already determined Northbrook Court could not generate the return they required, even with nearly $100M in incentives, and were simply keeping their options open while waiting for a more favorable market or a buyer with a greater appetite for risk. If that’s the case, a sale might ultimately be the best outcome—but if so, the Board should be working to ensure that Northbrook is positioned as a desirable development partner rather than allowing the project to drift indefinitely.
Rather than pressing for real leverage, the discussion shifted toward managing public expectations. The meeting had started with the illusion of control, but by the end, it felt more like an effort to prepare residents for the inevitable: Northbrook remains at the mercy of Brookfield’s inaction, and there is no clear sense of when—if ever—the project will move forward. What the Board made clear, however, is that they have exhausted their available options and have done everything within their power to move redevelopment forward.
While the Board maintained a cautious and diplomatic tone, residents did not hold back. Speaker after speaker expressed frustration, skepticism, and outright disbelief that Brookfield had any real intention of delivering on its promises.
One local developer directly challenged Brookfield’s assertion that luxury retail was struggling, pointing out that nearby shopping centers had no trouble attracting tenants. He even offered to partner with Brookfield to help get the project done—an offer that underscored just how little effort Brookfield appeared to be making on its own.
Another resident bluntly questioned Brookfield’s credibility, reminding the Board that the company had repeatedly placed the Village President in the difficult position of promising progress that never materialized. He called for Brookfield to sell the property to a developer that actually intends to build rather than stringing the community along indefinitely. It was a pointed moment in a night filled with thin reassurances.
Of the eleven residents who spoke, not one expressed confidence in Brookfield. Not a single person stood up to defend the developer or suggest that the village should continue waiting patiently. The public’s message was clear: faith in Brookfield has run out, and trust in the redevelopment process is eroding along with it.
The Board ultimately voted 4-1 in favor of granting Brookfield’s request—giving them everything they asked for without securing a single new commitment in return. No new milestones. No enforceable deadlines. No consequences for further delays.
The lone “no” vote was vaguely attributed to concerns over affordable housing, but whether the objection was about unit count, placement, or funding was never made clear. If one is going to be the sole dissenter—something exceedingly rare on a Board that almost always votes unanimously in favor of what is presented—then they should do so with a clear, forceful rationale. A vote against the proposal should have come with a demand for accountability, an insistence on better terms, or at the very least, a coherent argument for an alternative approach. Instead, it felt like a symbolic gesture, leaving residents to speculate on its intent rather than signaling any real opposition to the broader plan.
The Village President reiterated that the Village had done everything in its power to facilitate redevelopment but acknowledged that patience was running thin. It was a sobering admission—an acknowledgment that despite all the incentives, approvals, and discussions, Northbrook remains entirely at the mercy of Brookfield’s timeline and decisions. And if history is any indication, that means waiting indefinitely while the property continues to decay.
The only remaining hope is that private conversations between Brookfield, Village staff, and the Board are far more candid than what plays out in public meetings—that behind closed doors, there is real dialogue about the current reality and the limits of what’s possible. Otherwise, the village is left doing what it has done for years: waiting.
To the Board’s credit, they fast-tracked this discussion ahead of the village election—though whether that was a strategic effort to demonstrate engagement or simply a matter of timing is unclear. Regardless, the meeting did little to reassure the public or change the perception that the Board is out of options when it comes to moving Northbrook Court forward.
With fewer than 20 stores remaining open and the major blow of Apple—one of the last true retail anchors—closing its doors, Northbrook Court is little more than a hollowed-out reminder of what it once was. Once the crown jewel of the North Shore, the mall now stands as a testament to shifting retail trends, failed redevelopment efforts, and years of uncertainty.
As the losses mount and time drags on, one question looms larger than any other:
How did we get here?
A History of Evolution and Adaptation (1976–2017)
Since its opening in 1976, Northbrook Court has been a familiar fixture of the North Shore, though its place in the region’s retail hierarchy has always been more fluid than some might remember. The mall was designed to serve the area’s affluent shoppers, with Lord & Taylor, Neiman Marcus, and Sears as its original anchors. However, even in its early years, Northbrook Court had to work to define itself in a competitive suburban market. Unlike many enclosed malls that catered to a broad audience, it sought a more upscale identity, but it never fully secured its position as the dominant luxury destination for North Shore shoppers. Many still preferred Michigan Avenue’s Magnificent Mile for high-end retail, while others found Old Orchard Center—with its open-air layout and premium department stores—more appealing. Meanwhile, Hawthorn Mall, located farther northwest in Vernon Hills, became a major shopping destination for Lake County residents, drawing customers from the growing suburbs north of Northbrook.
From the beginning, Northbrook Court continually adapted. The addition of I. Magnin as an anchor store shortly after opening signaled a commitment to fashion-forward retail, but changes soon followed. Sears closed in 1983, citing market overlap with its other locations, and was replaced by JCPenney, which in turn closed in 1995 to make way for Marshall Field’s (later Macy’s). As department stores shifted and the mall industry faced increasing competition from both e-commerce and large-scale regional malls like Woodfield, Northbrook Court leaned into entertainment. The General Cinema 14-screen theater, which opened in 1996, later became an AMC in 2002, reflecting a broader industry trend toward making malls experience-driven rather than just retail-focused.
Recognizing the need for reinvention, Chicago-based General Growth Properties Inc. (GGP) acquired Northbrook Court in May 1998 with the intent of strengthening its appeal. The company sought to bring in more high-end retailers and position the mall as a true luxury shopping destination. However, while Northbrook Court introduced brands like Ross-Simons and Nicole Miller, it still struggled to carve out a distinct niche. By the late 1990s, it was too upscale to compete directly with traditional malls but not quite exclusive enough to rival Old Orchard or the Magnificent Mile. At the same time, the retail landscape itself was undergoing a seismic shift. Shoppers were venturing out to malls less frequently, visiting an average of 3.1 times per month, down from 3.7 in 1989, according to the International Council of Shopping Centers. They now had more choices than ever before, not just from competing malls but from emergent e-commerce players like Amazon.com, an expanding selection of catalog retailers, and new retail developments closer to home, such as Renaissance Place in Highland Park.
As Scott Baskin, CEO of menswear retailer Mark Shale, put it in 2000: "The North Shore is difficult. It's wonderful because it's a terribly affluent market. But the population hasn't gotten much bigger in the past 15 years, yet there are a whole lot of new places to shop."
Culturally, Northbrook Court also benefited from its connection to John Hughes films, reinforcing its place in the public imagination. Hughes, a longtime Northbrook resident, frequently set his films in the area, and the mall made a notable appearance in the 1985 film Weird Science, helping to solidify its reputation as a key teenage hangout of the era. While this pop-culture association helped give Northbrook Court a sense of nostalgia for many, it didn’t necessarily translate into long-term retail dominance.
By the early 2000s, Northbrook Court’s sales per square foot were approximately $350—above the national mall average of $318 but well below Old Orchard’s $450. This underscored a reality that often gets overlooked: Northbrook Court was always a strong performer, but it was never the undisputed leader in its market.
Unlike many shopping centers that depended on a strong local customer base, Northbrook Court was heavily reliant on shoppers from surrounding communities. In its prime, 94% of its sales tax revenue came from non-Northbrook residents—an advantage when times were good but a vulnerability when shopping habits began to shift. Whether the Village Board historically recognized and managed this risk is unclear. It is worth noting that our sales tax base has weathered the last five years reasonably well (per the Caucus platform—"up 5.8% from last year and 12.7% when compared with the average over the previous four years"), but the vast majority of that increase is attributable to changes in Illinois tax law requiring the collection of sales tax on online purchases, rather than any savvy risk management by the Village.
As shopping trends shifted and e-commerce accelerated, Northbrook Court began to struggle. By the end of the decade, it became clear that incremental updates would no longer be enough to keep the mall competitive. The next chapter in its story would not be about small adaptations—but about whether it could be completely reimagined before it was too late.
2010–2017: A Familiar Cycle in a Changing Landscape
Between 2010 and 2017, Northbrook Court continued adjusting to shifts in retail, introducing new stores while facing key closures. In 2010, California Pizza Kitchen opened on the mall’s north side, expanding its dining options, while H&M debuted a two-story location in 2011, reflecting an effort to attract popular fast-fashion brands. The mall also saw changes in home furnishings retail, with Arhaus opening in 2014, replacing Crate & Barrel, which relocated to a standalone building on the property but outside the main mall structure. Meanwhile, the food court and Johnny Rockets closed in 2009, making way for Forever 21, signaling a shift toward younger, trend-driven retailers.
Throughout this period, Northbrook Court remained a high-end shopping destination, anchored by Macy’s, Lord & Taylor, and Neiman Marcus, and featuring a mix of luxury and mid-tier brands such as Apple, Coach, Louis Vuitton, and True Religion. But even as new stores arrived, the mall's approach largely remained one of incremental adjustments rather than bold reinvention. Competition from e-commerce, nearby lifestyle centers, and changing consumer habits was accelerating, and the steady cycle of tenant reshuffling and store upgrades that had kept Northbrook Court relevant for decades was beginning to show its limits.
Unlike previous decades, where strategic additions helped the mall maintain a competitive edge, by the mid-2010s, it had become clear that Northbrook Court was struggling to keep pace with the rapidly evolving retail landscape. Other shopping centers across the country were beginning to experiment with mixed-use concepts—integrating entertainment, dining, and residential elements to create an all-encompassing experience. Northbrook Court, however, remained locked in a traditional mall model that was quickly becoming outdated.
For decades, Northbrook Court had always managed to adjust, adapt, and redefine itself just enough to keep pace with the evolving retail environment. But by 2017, the landscape had changed more dramatically than ever before. Department stores, once the anchors that defined malls, were rapidly losing their grip on consumer spending. Shopping habits were shifting at a pace that even the most forward-thinking malls struggled to match. What had once been a formula for longevity—refreshing stores, tweaking the tenant mix, and adding new restaurants—was no longer enough.
If Northbrook Court wanted to remain a destination, it needed to undergo perhaps the boldest transformation in its history. The challenge ahead wasn’t just about attracting new retailers or modernizing the space. It was about answering a much bigger question: what could a mall be in an era when malls themselves were being questioned?
A New Vision for Northbrook Court (2017–2020)
By 2017, Northbrook Court’s owners recognized that the traditional mall model was no longer sustainable. In January of that year, representatives from then-owner GGP announced that the mall could look significantly different in the coming years, outlining a vision with fewer anchor stores and a greater emphasis on non-traditional uses such as dining, entertainment, and residential development. This shift mirrored broader trends in the retail industry, where enclosed malls were increasingly pivoting away from their department store-driven past and toward mixed-use redevelopment strategies aimed at revitalization.
By 2018, the need for reinvention had only grown more urgent. The amount of available retail anchor space—the largest stores in shopping centers—hit an all-time high of 12.3 million square feet, up from 10.8 million in 2017, according to real estate services firm CBRE. With large spaces sitting vacant, it was clear that department stores were no longer the foundation of mall success. That reality became even clearer when Macy’s sold its Northbrook Court location to General Growth Properties (GGP) in early 2018, choosing to lease back the space rather than maintain ownership.
GGP responded with a bold redevelopment proposal, recognizing that traditional retail alone could no longer sustain Northbrook Court’s future. The 2018 redevelopment preliminary agreement between the Village and GGP included a $21.5 million incentive package, structured through a combination of Tax Increment Financing (TIF), a sales tax-sharing agreement, and reimbursements for infrastructure costs. This package was designed to facilitate a $250 million redevelopment plan, which sought to demolish the Macy’s building and replace it with a mixed-use development featuring a five-story apartment building with up to 315 rental units, over 100,000 square feet of new residential space, and a 70,000-square-foot grocery store.
Northbrook Court wasn’t alone in this approach. Other suburban malls were also looking beyond traditional retail to stay viable. In Vernon Hills, the owner of Hawthorn Mall was exploring plans to add up to 600 apartments and a hotel to its 1.3 million-square-foot property, responding to the loss of Sears and Carson’s—a challenge faced by many regional malls. This mirrored a broader trend in which developers sought to create live-work-play environments that could drive foot traffic even as retail continued to struggle.
In August 2018, Brookfield Property Partners acquired GGP, assuming control of Northbrook Court and its redevelopment plans. Under Brookfield’s leadership, the project moved forward, receiving crucial local support. By April 2019, the Northbrook Village Board established a Tax Increment Financing (TIF) district, citing the impending closure of Macy’s and broader economic factors as justification for the designation.
As required by Illinois’s TIF Act, the Board declared the soon-to-be vacant department store blighted, citing six of the 13 criteria necessary for such a designation: obsolescence, deterioration, inadequate utilities, deleterious land use and layout, a lack of community planning, and a lagging or declining assessed value. This classification was a necessary step in order to use TIF funding to incentivize redevelopment. The TIF district would capture all incremental property tax revenue resulting from the next 23 years of growth in the assessed value of the west portion of the mall.
At the time, the equalized assessed valuation (EAV) for the district stood at approximately $9.55 million. Based on projections from Kane, McKenna & Associates, a consulting firm hired by the Village, the expected private redevelopment would increase that valuation to between $70 million and $75 million. By law, 40 percent of the increased tax revenue collected within the district would be directed to the school districts.
The TIF vote occurred during the final meeting for two long-serving trustees, who together had contributed 50 years of service to the Board. Neither sought re-election after failing to receive endorsement from the Northbrook Caucus. They requested the TIF vote be held before their departure to ensure the project’s momentum. One of the trustees emphasized the importance of timely action, stating:
“I would like to be able to be in a position to vote in favor of this because I think it's important, and this is the board that it was brought forward to at that point in time.”
By June 2019, the Northbrook Village Board approved the redevelopment plan with a 5-2 vote. The plan included a $250 million investment to transform the mall with the five-story apartment building, over 100,000 square feet of new residential space, and a 70,000-square-foot grocery store.
One of the two dissenting trustees, who is no longer on the Board, expressed concerns about the fairness of providing significant economic incentives to a single business, referring to it as "corporate welfare." He argued that all businesses should pay their fair share of taxes and warned against setting a precedent where large corporations could leverage their size for tax benefits. The other dissenting trustee, who remains on the Board with a term expiring in 2027, advocated for the inclusion of affordable housing units within the development, highlighting the absence of such provisions in the approved plan.
Despite those concerns, local officials underscored the mall’s significance to Northbrook’s economy. The Village President at the time emphasized that Northbrook Court was the Village’s largest taxpayer, both in terms of sales tax and property tax contributions.
“It provides District 28 with over $2.5 million of property tax per year. It provides us with 25% of the sales tax we receive, the largest source of revenue to the general fund.”
The Village President also noted that both School District 28 and District 225 had signed off on the TIF, believing it would benefit them in the long run.
With anchor retail spaces sitting vacant at historic levels and consumer habits evolving faster than ever, Northbrook Court was preparing for its most ambitious transformation yet—but whether this plan would be enough remained to be seen.
Challenges and Uncertainties Amid Redevelopment Efforts (2020–2022)
Despite the optimism surrounding the 2019 approval of Northbrook Court’s redevelopment, the years that followed saw a series of setbacks that put the project’s future in doubt. By 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic upended the retail industry, accelerating store closures, slashing foot traffic, and forcing many landlords—including Brookfield Properties—to reassess their long-term strategies. With economic uncertainty dominating the landscape, the planned redevelopment was put on hold, and Northbrook Court—already struggling—drifted further into limbo.
Brookfield’s financial difficulties deepened over the next two years. In 2020, the company reported a $2 billion loss, reflecting the pandemic’s impact on its retail and office holdings. The strain became evident in 2021, when Brookfield defaulted on the remaining $117 million mortgage for Northbrook Court, prompting its lender, Barings, to explore options for selling the property. Around the same time, Northbrook Court was also among several commercial properties in Cook County that missed property tax payments, contributing to nearly $500 million in uncollected taxes across the region. These financial struggles cast doubt on whether the approved redevelopment plan would ever move forward.
Compounding the uncertainty, by this point, the Macy’s building had already been demolished to make way for the planned redevelopment. What was supposed to be the first tangible step toward transformation instead left a gaping hole in the property, a stark visual representation of the stalled progress. With a key anchor gone and no construction following, the mall’s future felt more precarious than ever.
At the same time, broader retail trends continued to shift away from traditional malls. By 2021, reports suggested that Brookfield was considering selling Northbrook Court entirely, raising concerns about whether any of the previously approved redevelopment plans would materialize. That same year, real estate analysts noted that Northbrook Court was struggling to retain tenants, with several higher-end retailers leaving and fewer businesses willing to commit to long-term leases in the uncertain environment. With major department stores nationwide shuttering locations and national retailers scaling back their footprints, Northbrook Court seemed stuck—too weak to thrive in its current state, yet still lacking a clear path forward.
Local officials acknowledged the stalled redevelopment but pointed to financial protections in place. The TIF district created in 2019 ensured that future tax revenue from redevelopment would be reinvested into the property, but the lack of immediate progress made it increasingly difficult to reassure residents and businesses that Northbrook Court would ever become the vibrant mixed-use center once envisioned.
Brookfield eventually recovered from these financial difficulties through a combination of strategic debt restructuring, asset sales, and market stabilization. As seen with Water Tower Place in 2022, the company transferred ownership of some struggling properties to lenders, shedding liabilities and improving its balance sheet. This restructuring, along with a gradual rebound in consumer demand, allowed Brookfield to stabilize its finances and refocus on its core holdings. By delaying or scaling back some of its more ambitious redevelopment plans, the company positioned itself to renegotiate debt, restore investor confidence, and explore repositioning efforts for Northbrook Court.
In what would become a recurring theme, the Village President struck an optimistic tone in the 2022 State of the Village address, assuring residents that Northbrook Court was “continuing to move forward.”
"I'm hoping that Northbrook Court will be in a position to bring something to us within the next 12 months. I'm hopeful. We continue to talk with them. We continue to have events at Northbrook Court. We continue to have meetings. I want Northbrook Court to know and understand that this village supports it and wants it to succeed."
But behind the optimism, the reality told a different story. While Brookfield had not officially abandoned the redevelopment, progress had all but stalled. Financial struggles, industry headwinds, and shifting market conditions left the project in limbo—raising the question: Was the 2018 plan for Northbrook Court ever going to move forward?
The Re-Redesign of Northbrook Court: 2023
The Village Board, acknowledging the challenges facing the retail sector, repeatedly extended the 2019 redevelopment agreement, giving Brookfield time to recalibrate. After years of stalled progress, shifting market conditions, and financial uncertainty, Brookfield returned in 2023 with a dramatically expanded vision for Northbrook Court—one that sought to transform, rather than merely revive, the aging property.
The Village President teased the update at the 2023 State of the Village address, offering just enough to stir anticipation:
"I'm so close to being able to talk about it. Brookfield Properties is Northbrook Court. We have been working very, very hard with them. I've probably met with Brookfield five or six times since becoming Village President. I want you to remember this slide—$3.1 million in sales tax and approximately $3 million in property tax to our schools. We have to do everything in our power to preserve that."
Brookfield’s new approach reflected a broader national trend—the traditional enclosed mall model was failing, but mixed-use districts integrating retail, dining, entertainment, and residential were proving more resilient. Instead of simply redeveloping the demolished Macy’s site, the vision now encompassed a long-term reimagination of nearly the entire 97-acre property. The 2019 plan, ambitious in its time, now felt almost conservative in comparison.
The turning point came on May 16, 2023, when the Village Board entered into a Pre-Development Agreement with Brookfield’s newly formed entity, Northbrook Court NewCo, LLC. While this agreement was largely non-binding, it established a framework for collaboration and outlined the necessary steps before any formal redevelopment could proceed. The Village and Brookfield pledged to work closely with key stakeholders—including local school districts, Cook County, Metra, and the Northbrook Park District—to ensure the project aligned with broader community needs.
A Phased Approach and the Evolution of the Master Plan
One of the most notable changes in the 2023 plan was the adoption of a phased development approach. Rather than tackling the entire project at once, Brookfield proposed starting with a new outdoor retail district, totaling approximately 115,000 square feet of high-end shops and dining options. At least 30% of this retail footprint was earmarked for luxury brands, an attempt to maintain Northbrook Court’s long-standing reputation as an upscale shopping destination. The plan also introduced up to 2,000 residential units, office space, a potential hotel, and extensive green space enhancements, including a linear park and pedestrian-friendly walkways.
This phasing strategy would later become a point of contention. By 2025, Brookfield would return to the Village Board, requesting more flexibility in the phasing process—despite having made no tangible progress on the project. Though the board ultimately approved the request, it underscored a growing concern: if Brookfield needed more flexibility so soon after securing approvals, how solid were their initial commitments? More critically, what had changed so drastically, and why had progress stalled almost immediately after their ambitious plans were approved?
Momentum Builds – June and August 2023
As discussions continued, the June 13, 2023, Village Board meeting set the stage for more formal approvals. Trustees expressed broad support for the conceptual master plan, emphasizing the need for complementary uses that would make the development a true destination. With unanimous agreement, the board voted to schedule a joint public hearing with the Plan Commission—a crucial step in the approval process.
That public hearing took place on August 29, 2023, where Brookfield executives, urban planners, and traffic consultants laid out the full redevelopment vision.
Brookfield Senior Vice President Ben Freeman argued that the redevelopment would reinvigorate Northbrook’s tax base, attract high-quality tenants, and create a thriving mixed-use district. He projected that outdoor retail spaces could open as early as 2026, though this claim was met with skepticism given Brookfield’s previous delays.
Village officials highlighted the strong support from local taxing bodies, including school districts and Cook County, for the proposed new tax increment financing (TIF) district. The project was expected to significantly boost assessed property values over the next two decades, with estimates suggesting that Northbrook Court’s valuation would rise from $72 million to $342 million by the end of the TIF period. The Village President noted that Northbrook Court remained the largest contributor of property and sales tax revenue in Northbrook, reinforcing the importance of revitalizing the site.
While many residents and business owners praised the plan’s potential economic and aesthetic benefits, others raised concerns about residential density, building heights, and traffic impacts on Randolph Road—a key access point for the development. Some also questioned whether Brookfield’s financial stability could support such an ambitious plan, especially given its track record of delays.
Despite the mixed feedback, the Plan Commission voted 8-0 to recommend approval of the redevelopment proposal, moving it forward to the Village Board.
Final Approvals – October 30, 2023
After months of negotiations and refinements, the Village Board met on October 30, 2023, to cast its final votes. This meeting marked the culmination of eight public hearings and nearly a year of deliberations.
The Village President opened by reviewing how the project had evolved and emphasizing that the redevelopment would be entirely funded by new revenue generated from the property, with no financial liability falling on Northbrook taxpayers. This structure was positioned as a safeguard, given Brookfield’s financial challenges in recent years.
The most debated issue of the evening was affordable housing. Under the agreement, Brookfield was required to either build affordable units or pay a fee-in-lieu to the village if they failed to secure financing for the units. Some trustees questioned whether tax credits and external financing could realistically support the development of these units. Others took issue with Brookfield’s plan to cluster the affordable housing in one area rather than integrating it throughout the development.
In the final vote, the board approved the redevelopment 6-1. The lone dissenting trustee, despite expressing general support for the overall project, raised concerns about the affordable housing component, specifically objecting to the clustering of units, the lack of guaranteed financing through tax credits, and the option for Brookfield to pay fees in lieu of building affordable units onsite. She also requested more time to further discuss and refine the affordable housing provisions but ultimately voted against the project due to these unresolved issues.
Brookfield officials reaffirmed their commitment to moving forward but did not provide specific construction start dates. The Village President requested that Brookfield return within a month to present updated renderings and a revised timeline, particularly addressing how the Macy’s site—which still had not been rebuilt—would be incorporated into early phases.
If Brookfield returned within a month, as requested, with a revised timeline, it’s not evident from the next two months of Village Board minutes. Yet, by early 2024, the Village President remained publicly optimistic about Northbrook Court’s future, dedicating a substantial portion of the State of the Village address to provide an update.
The 2024 State of the Village address featured an extended, almost nostalgic reflection on Northbrook Court—part history lesson, part reassurance. The Village President acknowledged the mall’s decline but framed the redevelopment as an ongoing effort, emphasizing the Board’s commitment and the financial incentives in place. While optimistic in tone, the speech leaned heavily on past efforts and broad visions rather than concrete signs of progress.
Below is the full quote, left in its entirety to ensure there is no mistake about what was said:
“Northbrook Court—here it is… here it is… here it is… here it is… okay, so Northbrook Court. Remember that bicentennial quarter? When I was a kid, I just thought that was the coolest thing. 1976 is when Northbrook Court opened. It's an inward-facing mall and it has 5,000 parking spaces and you know those commercials, it's not your father's Buick. I had a Buick. I loved it, it was my favorite car. But they don't build malls like this anymore. Malls now are destinations—there's a lot of entertainment, there's a lot of residential connected to a mall. So, Northbrook Court is perhaps obsolete and, even with that, it's still our number one sales tax provider. At its height, Northbrook Court was cooking at $6 million a year [in sales tax]; property taxes today—District 28 gets $2.4M and District 225 gets about $1.7M a year for no students. To lose this mall would be very difficult for us, not only for us but for our school partners. So the Village Board had an opportunity, and the opportunity was how do we take this large, internally-facing mall surrounded by all these parking fields and turn it into a vibrant, walkable, mixed-use neighborhood? Very challenging. The good news is that in about 2019, we had a plan and we had worked out with Northbrook Court that there would be some kind of improvement to the mall—that's why the Macy's came down and they talked about some investment there. And then, of course, COVID happened, so nothing happened. But Northbrook Court didn't want to lose the opportunity, and we didn't want to let them go. I've taken the most meetings with Northbrook Court. I don't even think Manager Pavlicek was fully sworn in and I was talking to her about Northbrook Court. We've got to get this thing going; the Village Board will not lose Northbrook Court. So, we used that 2019 agreement and we kept extending it and we kept extending it with the hope that we're going to be able to figure something out. We got together again with our partners in District 225 and District 28 and Brookfield Properties (the owner of the mall) and figured [out] how are we going to come up with an incentive agreement that makes it advantageous for everyone? Continues giving our schools property tax money, continues giving us sales tax money, invests in our future, and makes it feasible for Brookfield to really make an investment. While we approved an incentive agreement November of 2023, we probably were working on this for 18 months or two years. What it looks like is we took the 2019 TIF and we replaced that with a brand new TIF that covered the entirety of the mall. We established a business district (this is what Old Orchard has done). Brookfield wanted us to implement that 1% sales tax just for the Northbrook Court area to help finance the development, which will go into effect in July 2025. In trade, Brookfield said we're going to invest nearly $1B in this. It's going to be an outdoor shopping retail, dining, and entertainment experience right at the front. Neiman Marcus will stay where it is but all along Lake Cook Road is where we're going to see the retail. Construction is going to start this year – it's been approved. They're working on the engineering this year, the retail is going to open in May 2026. In addition to that, we're going to create a neighborhood around the mall with street landscaping, native plantings, public art, green space, connectivity, seating, and outdoor dining. We're going to have parking, utilities screened so it's pleasant. Of course, we're going to address stormwater management. Phase one, we're going to have 750 units of housing and 100 of those units are going to be ‘workforce housing,’ meaning housing that's more affordable. I know that our kids will be able to move back, I know that teachers, firefighters, and police officers will be able to live here because they can afford to live here. In addition to that, the developer is giving the Village of Northbrook an acre and a half to build additional units of housing and $4.5M as a fee in lieu of building units on site for affordable housing. So, there will be some units on site and then we'll have some money to acquire housing elsewhere throughout the community or to offer programs to help folks afford to live here. They're also going to give us one acre where we can build a fire station. Northbrook currently has three, and at some point, we're going to need a fourth.”
That was the pitch: Northbrook Court was evolving into something new. The 2023 redevelopment agreement had replaced the 2019 plan with an expanded vision and renewed commitments from Brookfield. Construction, we were told, would begin in 2024, with retail opening by mid-2026.
This optimism was palpable but short-lived. With no discernible updates for the remainder of 2024, by the time of the 2025 State of the Village—just months before Brookfield would return with its request for more flexibility—it had to be abundantly clear behind the scenes that no progress was coming anytime soon. The optimism that had defined prior updates was now noticeably restrained.
“I want to talk just for a second on Northbrook Court. Folks ask me a lot about Northbrook Court and I think for a lot of people Northbrook Court is sentimental—they went there when they were a kid, I went there when I was a kid, and they care about it and they want it to be. The truth is malls don't get built like that anymore—that's an obsolete mall and it's going to need to change. But I think what's important for everybody to know is that this Village Board has placed a focus on retaining our current businesses and recruiting new businesses. As we see, and as we have seen for years and years, Northbrook [Court] sales taxes go down, we've been able to actually make up for that in other areas.”
It was a stark departure from the enthusiasm of previous years. No reaffirmation of the 2026 retail opening, no assurances that Brookfield remained on track, no reference to continued meetings ensuring progress. Instead, the messaging had shifted—intentionally or not—to a broader discussion of business retention elsewhere, as if to redirect attention from the uncomfortable reality that Northbrook Court’s transformation was once again slipping further out of reach.
Conclusion: A Project Stuck in Neutral
Seven years of shifting timelines and increasingly ambitious visions have led to nothing. Northbrook Court remains stalled. Despite approvals, incentives, and repeated extensions, no tangible progress has been made. The current Village Board has exhausted its known options. Whether a different Village Board—one with more experience or creativity—could change the outcome is unclear.
Northbrook Court was never sustained by Northbrook alone—it depended on drawing shoppers from across the region. As consumer habits shifted, that foundation crumbled, and efforts to secure redevelopment have led only to delay, hesitation, and shifting priorities from Brookfield.
The reality likely falls somewhere along a spectrum, with some combination of the following: Brookfield is an ineffective developer, and a more capable one could have delivered (and would have by now); Northbrook is an inherently difficult place to build, and for whatever reason, Brookfield refuses to publicly articulate what changes would make it more feasible for them; and Northbrook Court simply isn’t a lucrative enough asset relative to what Brookfield paid for it.
While the Board has few levers left to pull, there are still some paths it could take—though none are particularly easy or guaranteed to work.
One option would be for the Board to start playing hardball with Brookfield and signal that no further approvals or flexibility would be granted unless the developer actually delivers on something tangible. This approach has merit—it would at least send a message that Northbrook won’t continue accommodating endless delays. But given Brookfield’s track record, it’s doubtful that a tougher stance alone would change their approach.
Another possibility is to accept that Brookfield is simply biding time, keeping all options open until they can find a buyer willing to take the property off their hands. If that’s the case, there’s an argument that Northbrook’s best move is to keep up the illusion of enthusiasm—making it clear to any potential buyer that the Village is eager to support redevelopment. Brookfield would certainly prefer that all public statements remain focused on the bright vision ahead rather than on the reality of stalled progress. If this were the strategy, one would expect a more carefully managed public narrative. Instead, the clumsy handling of the March 11th meeting suggests otherwise.
A more drastic approach would be for the Village to buy the property itself. As seen in my previous piece on Grainger, Northbrook is not an ideal property owner. The Village would need a committed buyer or a lucrative public-private partnership to justify such a move. Even then, it assumes Northbrook could find a buyer faster than Brookfield—a major real estate firm—or that Brookfield has no interest in remaining involved, both of which seem unlikely.
Then, of course, there’s the most ambitious solution: build a time machine. If Northbrook could travel back to the early 2010s—before department stores began collapsing and before e-commerce took off—the redevelopment process could have started sooner, giving the mall a real chance at reinvention before its decline became irreversible. A more modest use of the time machine would be to simply go back to 2017 and block Brookfield from buying GGP and, with it, Northbrook Court in the first place, preventing years of stagnation before they even started. Unfortunately, until such technology is invented, this remains as realistic as waiting for Brookfield to miraculously break ground.
Finally, there is the nuclear option: eminent domain. The Village could attempt to force Brookfield’s hand by condemning the property and seizing it under the argument that Northbrook Court is now a blighted site that serves no productive economic or community purpose. This path, however, would be an uphill battle—legally, financially, and politically. The Village would need to declare the property blighted and argue that its continued decline negatively impacts the surrounding community. Legal proceedings would follow, likely resulting in a lengthy and expensive eminent domain fight with Brookfield. If the Village succeeded, it would be required to compensate Brookfield at fair market value—tens of millions of dollars—only to then face the same challenge Brookfield is struggling with: finding a viable path forward for the property.
On one hand, eminent domain would give Northbrook direct control over the site, removing an uncooperative developer and forcing redevelopment into motion. On the other, it would be an expensive legal fight with no guaranteed payoff, potentially straining taxpayer resources for years while leaving the Village holding a property it still has to figure out how to sell or develop.
For decades, Northbrook reaped the benefits of Northbrook Court’s success without having to ensure it remained viable—leaving the village exposed when the model that sustained it began to collapse. Now, we are left waiting, with no clear path forward and no control over what happens next.