Is Naperville Chicago's "Second City" (Aurora, Joliet: real estate, credit)

[westburbsil]

I know the Second city comes from the city being rebuilt for Chicago, but was downtown Naperville this past weekend and simply blown away. I used to live in the city a long time ago, now out in Fox Valley, have been to every burb and NWI and as of 2017 have never seen a suburban downtown with as much energy, activity in the Chicago burbs than Downtown Naperville.


It has grown so much and with the improvements along the riverwalk and The Water Street area open and not even finished, it is simply unbelievable.

You literally having shopping of all kinds, high end restaurants all found in Chicago, the two big deep dish, Apple, winery shops, pubs, bookstores, clubs, a college all in a dense area of 6-7 blocks.

Amazingly, there is another section of Naperville right off 88 that has been filled will restaurants of all kinds. Oak Brook and Schaumburg has these type of restaurants, but no downtown like Naperville.

Evanston and Oak Park are more urban and dense, but dont offer as much IMO when you look at it.


Naperville get's good remarks and bad on this forum and those against sprawl I agree and don't find it tasteful in will county south on 59.

That said give credit where credit is due IMO, those who oversaw this city over the last 40 years is something to be admired.

[damba]

Originally Posted by westburbsil

Evanston and Oak Park are more urban and dense, but dont offer as much IMO when you look at it.

In no way should Evanston or Oak Park be compared to Naperville. Different strokes for different folks.
The things they have to offer aren't even on the radar for folks want to live in a place like Naperville.

[chet everett]

The relative issues that Naperville has had to deal with as it has grown are not uncommon -- the massive employment that once was centered around larger firms like ATT has mostly fallen way off. As things have "aged" in both the sections near the tollway as well as Naperville's downtown core there has been a mostly cooperative effort to balance desires of residents with the requests of commercial developers. The City administrators have not generally fallen into the trap of offering overly generous "incentives" but neither have they tried to force overly restrictive demands onto projects that offer reasonable benefits.

The thing too is that Naperville really has greatly benefitted from the overall desirability of things that are harder to "build up" -- the biggest such positive is almost certainly the relative success of the schools. When compared to other towns with similar features it is almost certainly true that Naperville has more uniformly desirable schools than any similarly sized area in the region. Adjacent Aurora is nearly as large in population but has far more challenges when it comes to schools -- the relatively desirable D204 along the eastern most edge of Aurora / western edge of Naperville mostly equate to good demand for housing, but the far more troubled section of Aurora that include much of the traditional core of Aurora served by D131 is significantly less valued. The western side of Aurora, served by D129, is mostly more desirable, but lacking the good rail access and charm of Naperville's core is not as traditionally valued...

There are probably some lessons to be learned by politicians, planners and developers who would like to duplicate some of the success of Naperville, but too often the focus is on things that are either hard for even Naperville to have success with(like outdated retail along some of the arterials...) or things that really are kind of impossible to duplicate (the specific configuration of the old quarry that is the basis for the Centennial Beach and related development...). I would mostly agree that Oak Park and Evanston are in a different "tier" of development -- they are both, for better or worse, much more "city like" than any suburb. I'd also say there are LOTS of other very nice suburbs that I really would not compare to Naperville -- from the very low density residential, top end mall and office campuses of Oak Brook, to "hidden" towns like Lincolnshire or Mettawa, to very pricey very residential focused towns like Hinsdale, Clarendon Hills, and Western Springs along the BNSF to the North Shore towns like Wilmette, Winnetka, Glencoe and Kenilworth there are few characteristics of these area that reflect the key features of Naperville. Similarly, while I do know that many of the developers and municipal officials of key south / southwest towns have tried to emulate some of the features of Naperville, that success has been elusive and even the better efforts in Orland Park, Mokena, Plainfield or Frankfort just don't measure up. Older towns like Flossmoor don't really have the opportunity to branch out in ways that Naperville has, nor is the base of corporate development or even retail at all comparable.

It is also worth mentioning that the some characteristics of Naperville are echo'ed in other towns -- parts of Wheaton, Glen Ellyn, Downers Grove, Elmhurst and Lombard really do compare extremely well -- developers who recognize the value of such towns have in putting their unique features to work for them AS WELL AS building on similarity to Naperville have mostly been successful.

The other part of the equation, of judging how much the success is not really driven by the various investments in things like improved parking and /or tightly planned central business district, is somewhat trickier -- as much as I like LaGrange I don't see very much of the "Naperville style" development at work there. I suppose much of that has to do with how focused LaGrange really in on its central business area vs lack of any of the "business parks" that really do seem to be part of the successful mix in most towns in DuPage Co (one could argue that towns like Westchester outflanked LaGrange in that area...).

There is also something that is not exactly "luck" but you sure can't call it science either -- when I think of how many of the nicer towns in the greater NW suburbs COULD have been much more like Naperville I am struck as to how few compare well. Again, I know LOTS of factors are way outside the direct control of any single developer or political leader but towns like Park Ridge, Rosemont, Arlington Heights, DesPlaines, Mt. Prospect, Hoffman Estates, Barrington, Long Grove, even Libertyville each have some of the pieces that work in Naperville, but none pull off the same scope or resiliency especially considering similar shifts in employment and such...

[ToriaT]

Naperville really does have a nice downtown area. But...there are many other suburbs also that are as nice or even nicer than Naperville maybe their downtowns are not quite as vibrant but they compare very favorably. What I don't like about Naperville is just how big it is and the lack of community feeling you get when things get so big and popular and attract so many people from out of state.

[westburbsil]

Very good points across the board. Out in the Fox Valley, it is more quaint and more of a community feeling. The old money north shore is obviously very quaint(the downtown's), but the old money feel is for sure there.

For a city its size, it is quite impressive(Naperville that is). I do agree the schools play a major role. Most people cannot afford the New Trier real estate schools, but a lot of upper middle class can afford Naperville 203 and 204.

If someone from out of town asked me the most vibrant suburb outside downtown Chicago it would be Naperville and right now not even close IMO.

[ToriaT]

Not all parts of Naperville are vibrant, mostly its just the downtown area. Sadly, Naperville is so big geographically, that its far flung reaches are sprawl and bear no resemblance to the downtown area, and may be located mile away from it. I actually live closer to downtown Naperville than some parts of Naperville do and I don't even live in Naperville. So it depends on where you live there. But if you are looking for something similar to Naperville, look at Wheaton and Glen Ellyn. Both are charming and have beautiful neighborhoods and homes. They are not as sprawly as Naperville and may be better located to transportation. Where I live you can get to the downtowns of Wheaton, Glen Ellyn and Napervllle in less than fifteen minutes.

[BIG CATS]

Originally Posted by ToriaT

Not all parts of Naperville are vibrant, mostly its just the downtown area. Sadly, Naperville is so big geographically, that its far flung reaches are sprawl and bear no resemblance to the downtown area, and may be located mile away from it. I actually live closer to downtown Naperville than some parts of Naperville do and I don't even live in Naperville. So it depends on where you live there. But if you are looking for something similar to Naperville, look at Wheaton and Glen Ellyn. Both are charming and have beautiful neighborhoods and homes. They are not as sprawly as Naperville and may be better located to transportation. Where I live you can get to the downtowns of Wheaton, Glen Ellyn and Napervllle in less than fifteen minutes.

Wheaton and Glen Ellyn are lovely, but nothing on the scale or vibrancy that Naperville offers, which is the point of this thread. Other towns like St. Charles and Geneva have nice cores, too, but after dark they peter out, whereas Naperville's engines are just getting fired up for the night. I believe Naperville is Chicago's "second city", without a doubt.

[ToriaT]

Its nice if you like that "mad house" atmosphere and waiting in lines to go to dinner. I prefer some of the quieter off the beaten path corners of DuPage county. I rarely go into downtown Naperville if I can help it no parking except the big structures and too many people.

[TheTimidBlueBars]

IMO, we don't really have a "second city". Chicago is by far the largest municipality in its metro area, and the runners-up (Naperville, Elgin, Aurora, Joliet) are all pretty close in population. None of them particularly stands out above the others in history or cultural vibrancy, either.

[chet everett]

Originally Posted by TheTimidBlueBars

IMO, we don't really have a "second city". Chicago is by far the largest municipality in its metro area, and the runners-up (Naperville, Elgin, Aurora, Joliet) are all pretty close in population. None of them particularly stands out above the others in history or cultural vibrancy, either.

Even the most ardent supporters of like Aurora or Elgin would acknowledge that the successes of Naperville ESPECIALLY in effectively using its history and planning to ENHANCE the "cultural vibrancy" puts in another league. To even group Joliet with the others is really a painful thing that does more to highlight the dramatic failures to even have the kinds of success that parts of Aurora or Elgin have been able to build on.

It is not just the "notorious" aspects of Joliet's history like the state prison that have proven to be pitfalls hard to overcome, but even the areas around things like its historic iron works that seem to attract no serious efforts of redevelopment. Literally a block or two from the Will County Courts there are vacant areas that seem to repel any investor, this is oddly similar to the similar section in Lake Co around the county facilities in Waukegan. For a variety of reasons the investments that some counties have made in professional style facilities in Wheaton for DuPage Co and Geneva for Kane County have helped the areas around their older historic central court buildings and pretty clearly shows that trying to scrimp to keep an antiquated site going is a terrible long decision that hurts the whole region...

Nobody is going to suggest that Chicago faces any "threat" from Naperville for nightlife options but the fact is that the path of development that has been a long term strategy that has built in the walkability and primacy of the historic core has been very successful and Naperville CLEARLY has been far more successful in leveraging the best of its history with modern developments.