Which Chicago burb will end up having the better riverfront set up. Any opinions? (Aurora: hotels, live in)

[forever_becoming]

Naperville

St. Charles

Other

[edsg25]

Interesting question. Great topic for discussion. But you may wish to add some detail as to what you're looking for here. I'm not sure if you're asking about increased commercial development along the banks or if all development, including parkland, is included in your thoughts.

First off, I think you named the two best riverfront in suburban Chicagoland. I would throw in Geneva as a close third. And, quite frankly, any town on the Fox seems to qualify as a great riverfront location.

But back to your question...Naperville has an advantage over St. Charles. The DuPage River is very narrow and encourages development in a way the Fox cannot. I'm thinking here would be the DuPage River gives the opportunity for Naperville to have the type of model that San Antonio's famed riverwalk has....development on both sides of the river in a interconnected, walkable environment.

San Antonio has the nation's most acclaimed river walk. Second to it is the Second City, but Chicago River though not wide, is still much wider than the rivers in Naperville and San Antonio and would be ill-equipped, IMHO, to be able to develop the kind of commercially lined development.

[3goodmonths]

Easily Naperville

[forever_becoming]

I've heard OKC has a pretty happening riverwalk also but I've never been there. Do you think Naperville is attempting that San Antonio/OKC design with the gondolas and party atmosphere? I'd like to see it but I'm doubting it will happen.

I wasn't really referring to the amount of hotels each place will have because I'm not really concerned with how many non local tourists will turn out. Restaurants along a river is appealing to me though. I guess mainly I'm curious about the parkland development. It seems as though St. Charles committees are adding a whitewater park, sculptures, biking trails and other park development maybe with hopes it will draw commercial development and Naperville is attempting to draw tourism with commercial development? It will be interesting to see how each turn out.

I agree that cities along the Fox have made progress with their riverfront development, Aurora with their new concert venue and Yokville with added water activities.

Originally Posted by edsg25

Interesting question. Great topic for discussion. But you may wish to add some detail as to what you're looking for here. I'm not sure if you're asking about increased commercial development along the banks or if all development, including parkland, is included in your thoughts.

First off, I think you named the two best riverfront in suburban Chicagoland. I would throw in Geneva as a close third. And, quite frankly, any town on the Fox seems to qualify as a great riverfront location.

But back to your question...Naperville has an advantage over St. Charles. The DuPage River is very narrow and encourages development in a way the Fox cannot. I'm thinking here would be the DuPage River gives the opportunity for Naperville to have the type of model that San Antonio's famed riverwalk has....development on both sides of the river in a interconnected, walkable environment.

San Antonio has the nation's most acclaimed river walk. Second to it is the Second City, but Chicago River though not wide, is still much wider than the rivers in Naperville and San Antonio and would be ill-equipped, IMHO, to be able to develop the kind of commercially lined development.

[aga412]

Originally Posted by edsg25

Interesting question. Great topic for discussion. But you may wish to add some detail as to what you're looking for here. I'm not sure if you're asking about increased commercial development along the banks or if all development, including parkland, is included in your thoughts.

First off, I think you named the two best riverfront in suburban Chicagoland. I would throw in Geneva as a close third. And, quite frankly, any town on the Fox seems to qualify as a great riverfront location.

But back to your question...Naperville has an advantage over St. Charles. The DuPage River is very narrow and encourages development in a way the Fox cannot. I'm thinking here would be the DuPage River gives the opportunity for Naperville to have the type of model that San Antonio's famed riverwalk has....development on both sides of the river in a interconnected, walkable environment.

San Antonio has the nation's most acclaimed river walk. Second to it is the Second City, but Chicago River though not wide, is still much wider than the rivers in Naperville and San Antonio and would be ill-equipped, IMHO, to be able to develop the kind of commercially lined development.

I'd tie Batavia for third with Geneva. Not because it's better/worse than Geneva's but it's charming in its own way. They've put a lot of effort into increased beautification in recent times. I feel like I've seen Batavia's riverfront/riverwalk often rank higher than Geneva's on publications regarding the subject (with Naperville usually as number 1). Like someone mentioned, DuPage is a lot easier to build around than the Fox, so while none of the Tri-Cities or FV towns could come close to Naperville, many have worked well with what they have.

[doodlemagic]

I think St Charles is a cool town but they are so far west and there's no conveient or easy way to get there. I know Naperville is a ways out from the city but at least you can take 88 there hop off and it's not a terrible ride from the expressway.

[forever_becoming]

Originally Posted by doodlemagic

I think St Charles is a cool town but they are so far west and there's no conveient or easy way to get there. I know Naperville is a ways out from the city but at least you can take 88 there hop off and it's not a terrible ride from the expressway.

No easy way to get to St. Charles from where?

[doodlemagic]

Originally Posted by forever_becoming

No easy way to get to St. Charles from where?

Anywhere lol.

[forever_becoming]

Seems easy. Depending on where a person is coming from, they can just do this:

1. 64
2. 59, 64
3. 90, 59, 64

[whakru]

Originally Posted by forever_becoming

Seems easy. Depending on where a person is coming from, they can just do this:

1. 64
2. 59, 64
3. 90, 59, 64

Rt 59 is a PITA to travel on for long periods of time. I live in Naperville and have to travel to STC for my daughters games in the fall and spring and it stinks. There is no easy, QUICK, way to get to STC.