Quote:
Originally Posted by Centropolis
those ring cities around chicago had some sort of relationship at an economic tier more distant than a rail suburb but i think
still on a continuum. just like the crescent of french founded cities around st. louis. they formed a sort of regional unit smaller than a state, territory, or province.
|
Yeah, they were certainly part of Chicago's hinterland even if they were not really commuter suburbs at first. The industrial product was funneled thru Chicago and relied on Chicago-area suppliers, as I mentioned above. But these towns started to take on commuter-suburb status even before WW2. These towns tended to be the terminus of the commuter service offered by various railroads. The train service these towns had in 1930, even before sprawl happened, is not much different from the service they have today on Metra. The defunct interurban system (Chicago, Aurora & Elgin / North Shore) provided another layer of connection to Chicago and its first-ring suburbs that was perhaps more suited to working-class folks than an executive commuting to LaSalle Street.
There is another ring of towns a little further out like Ottawa, DeKalb or Kankakee that were also part of the hinterland, but with a slightly weaker connection.
One question I've wondered is,
can these towns gentrify since they offer a more authentic urban experience in the suburbs? I've always thought Elgin would eventually gentrify, with access to Chicago and Tollway corridor jobs. But maybe their "urban-lite" status is the worst of both worlds? Waukegan and Gary are probably too far destroyed - which is a shame, since the lake is a huge amenity especially in Waukegan. The closest analogies I can think of are Lowell and Worcester, MA which have seen limited success with downtown redevelopment but their neighborhoods have not significantly turned over and average incomes remain unchanged.