Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve-o
Im up in Lake Forest several times a year so Im quite familiar with the north shore prestigious 'burbs. The point Im trying to make is that while the north shore is very uppity in many areas, there are also many areas that are no different than St. Charles. And while many areas of St. Charles are no different than, say, parts of Evanston, there are certainly areas that have beautiful grand old homes that rival those found in Lake Forest. Same goes for the Barringtons, Oak Park, Hinsdale, Geneva, etc. Sure many of the west burbs consist of many new developments that house McMansions, it shouldnt go w/o notice that many parts of the western burbs are just as old and uppity as many neighborhoods found in Winnetka, or Kenilworth. There is both old AND new money in ALL uppity burbs.
|
But your argument is invalid and misleading. You keep saying that there are
parts of St. Charles, and Naperville that are Northe Shor'ish'. This fact is true, but very misleading, and the reason while these towns will never be considered the prestigious suburbs of Chicago. Where your argument becomes false is when one switches the words around of your statement. You can say all you want that
individual old neighborhoods, the downtown, the riverwalk, and the parks can be compared the North Shore. But don't be foolish. I am not quiet as naive as it may appear. Naperville holds close to 150K people, making one of the biggest cities in Illinois! Even if I was not familiar with Naperville, (which I'm VERY familiar with), it doesn't make sense to believe that
all those people live in that quaint, clean downtown area that seems to be all that the HUGE Illinois city of Naperville has to offer. Outside of these small areas,
on all sides, is outrageous sprawl that has consumed so much land, it is now land locked on every side with nothing more than cookie-cutter subdivisions, and strip malls! This is Naperville and St. Charles. So in other words, you can say all you want that there are
small parts of these towns that remind you of the North Shore, but what you can't say is that the
whole of Kenilworth, Glencoe, Lake Forest, etc. reminds you of Naperville. Using your argument, you can say that there are parts of
Aurora that are VERY Naperville'ish'. This statement is true, but as we all know, does not indicate that Aurora, as of today, has the same status of Naperville or St. Charles. Do you not agree? I have never once thought of Hinsdale or the Barringtons have anything to do with the west burbs like Aurora, so I don't quite understand the argument you have there. Lets just be honest. If Bill Gates came to you today, and asked you what place in Chicagoland would have the same prestige as Lake Washington, Washington, no one, in a million, trillion years, would ever say Naperville or St. Charles! How foolish is that? Now, if a soccer mom type of family were moving into the area than most people would be more than happy to show off Naperville. Like I said before, prestige takes time to gain. Naperville's downtown area is old in sense of its founding date, but not in terms of where it is today. You can't all of a sudden explode in population to your borders and then all of a sudden gain grand titles like this. Nice try, but since everyone seems to be in agreement on this, I think the case is settled in our favor.
