Livable city strategies in diverse suburbs : Aurora and Naperville, Illinois

The livable city movement aims to revitalize cities by increasing their, safety, excitement, and overall quality of life. Based on model cities, such as Baltimore, livability has been reduced to a formula for economic development. The formula, which usually involves increased cultural outlets, more recreation opportunities, enhanced environmental quality, and a commitment to pedestrianism and public spaces, has been credited with reversing the fortunes of cities from Cleveland to Jacksonville. Although conceived of for central cities, the success of the livable city formula has encouraged suburban communities to adopt many of its elements. The suburbs of a large metropolis vary greatly among themselves, however. Some resemble center cities in their social characteristics and economic base, while other are comfortable refuges from the problems affecting the wider metropolis.

An examination of two very different Chicago suburbs, both of which have implemented livable city strategies, shows that their use of the formula differs, both in the elements they adopt and the goals toward which their policies are aimed. Aurora, a fading industrial suburb with many center city type problems, uses place animation and pedestrianism to enhance the city's appeal to outsiders. Naperville, an affluent suburb, incorporates elements of the formula into overall policies aimed at increasing the city's attractiveness for current and potential residents. This case suggests that while the livable city movement, with its emphasis on publicness and pluralism, is often portrayed as democratic in its effect, its selective adaptation by suburban municipalities perpetuates different roles and fortunes.