"Cleveland ... poised to be the new Chicago," says a Chicagoan... True? (Brooklyn: apartments, hotel)

[GiGi603]

No!

[Yac]

24 deleted posts later, I have 2 things to say:
The usual suspects, you know who you are - check your inboxes.
The rest - you really should know better by now.
Now please, back on topic.
Yac.

[1watertiger]

Cleveland has surprisingly many many things to do. as mentioned above, Orchestra, theatre, museums, sports teams, etcetera..it would be very difficult to find another city comparable in metro size that can offer as much as Cleveland, I would even go as far to say it has more to do and offer than many larger cities. however Cleveland is not Chicago, in size or regarding options for entertainment. both are fantastic cities however.

[usroute10]

Originally Posted by WRnative

Steeps, you constantly miss my point.

Most Greater Clevelanders wouldn't trade Chicago's superior downtown, superior downtown parks, or even superior lakefront parks for our Metroparks. That's where we've put our money ($112 million annual Metroparks budget in a much smaller community).

My only reason to post negative aspects of life in Chicago is not to belittle Chicago. It's to reinforce my argument that we should not yearn to become Chicago. I'm sorry that this angers you so much.

Chicago has a significant number of large "forest preserves" that encircle the city. I mean a HUGE number of them, probably 15-20. In fact, one of them has a waterfall.

Waterfall Glen

PLEASE SEE THE PHOTO OF THIS 2,500 ACRE FOREST PRESERVE IN THE ABOVE LINK!! That park is very reminiscient of the parks in the Cleveland Area.

Chicago made it a priority early in the 20th century to dedicate their lakefront to public parkland - and have done a magnificent job making it a destination and a source of recreation and relaxation for Chicago residents - much, much so than what Cleveland has done with its lake front.

In addition, within the city limits are a plethora of 200-400 acre parks, such as Marquette Park, Humboldt Park, Douglas Park, as well as the 1,200-acre Lincoln Park - all of which contain ponds, lagoons, gardens, etc. Does the city of Cleveland have ANY large parks in the city limits, besides maybe Edgewater?

Lastly, Chicago has a Parks and Boulevard system, (where boulevards connect parks to each other and the lakefront) that is surprising highlighted in the below UrbanOhio thread.

http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php?topic=17871.0

Chicago's parks may not have the topographical relief as some of Cleveland's Metroparks and the CVNP, but there is plenty of parkland/nature preserves in Chicagoland....

....and the reason why housing prices are higher in Chicago is because the quality of life is higher - the expansive Loop, the near north and west side neighborhoods, the lakefront/beaches, the extensive rapid transit, 5 pro sports teams, two elite universities, world-renowned art-architecture-entertainment, etc.

[bjimmy24]

Originally Posted by usroute10

....and the reason why housing prices are higher in Chicago is because the quality of life is higher - the expansive Loop, the near north and west side neighborhoods, the lakefront/beaches, the extensive rapid transit, 5 pro sports teams, two elite universities, world-renowned art-architecture-entertainment, etc.

And astronomical property taxes!!

[Kamms]

Originally Posted by bjimmy24

And astronomical property taxes!!

And a fiscal debt-ridden disaster.

[Kamms]

Originally Posted by usroute10

Chicago has a significant number of large "forest preserves" that encircle the city. I mean a HUGE number of them, probably 15-20. In fact, one of them has a waterfall.

Waterfall Glen

PLEASE SEE THE PHOTO OF THIS 2,500 ACRE FOREST PRESERVE IN THE ABOVE LINK!! That park is very reminiscient of the parks in the Cleveland Area.

Chicago made it a priority early in the 20th century to dedicate their lakefront to public parkland - and have done a magnificent job making it a destination and a source of recreation and relaxation for Chicago residents - much, much so than what Cleveland has done with its lake front.

In addition, within the city limits are a plethora of 200-400 acre parks, such as Marquette Park, Humboldt Park, Douglas Park, as well as the 1,200-acre Lincoln Park - all of which contain ponds, lagoons, gardens, etc. Does the city of Cleveland have ANY large parks in the city limits, besides maybe Edgewater?

Lastly, Chicago has a Parks and Boulevard system, (where boulevards connect parks to each other and the lakefront) that is surprising highlighted in the below UrbanOhio thread.

http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php?topic=17871.0

Chicago's parks may not have the topographical relief as some of Cleveland's Metroparks and the CVNP, but there is plenty of parkland/nature preserves in Chicagoland....

....and the reason why housing prices are higher in Chicago is because the quality of life is higher - the expansive Loop, the near north and west side neighborhoods, the lakefront/beaches, the extensive rapid transit, 5 pro sports teams, two elite universities, world-renowned art-architecture-entertainment, etc.

Chicago's rapid transit lines are not extensive as much as one would think. The CTA is a large system, no doubt, but large areas of the city are serviced by the ''L''.

[Kamms]

Originally Posted by Kamms

Chicago's rapid transit lines are not extensive as much as one would think. The CTA is a large system, no doubt, but large areas of the city are serviced by the ''L''.

Correction: ''but large areas of the city are NOT serviced by the L''

[OyCrumbler]

Originally Posted by Kamms

Correction: ''but large areas of the city are NOT serviced by the L''

Eh, large areas of NYC are not covered by its subway system. This is true for any large rapid transit system where the legal physical boundaries (which can be really arbitrary) are larger than the area of coverage which, in the case of rapid transit, generally lies along the densest corridors where it makes sense. So, basically, I don't really understand this detraction on Chicago.

Chicago's system, especially for a city in the US, is extensive.

[bhmu93]

From the perspective of a Cleveland native who lived in Chicago for a number of years....there are elements of Chicago that should be emulated, and a number that definitely shouldn't. Apologies in advance for the length of this post.

Cleveland can certainly learn a lot from Chicago's investment in the lakefront. Their lakefront was a major variable in maintaining quality of life - and therefore some degree of population stability - from the 60s-80s. While Cleveland has made significant strides with green space/bike path development along the river, and the improvements have been dramatic with the Metroparks taking over Edgewater and others; I have trouble getting past the persistent misuse/underutilization of the eyesore known as Burke - which provides nominal public utility today. If local/state officials had the collective political will to ask, the FAA would give back the land if the roughly $10M FAA investment was paid back - which is doable via private funds. If even half the Burke land were turned into a park, people would absolutely use it. Chicagoans regularly travel en masse from west-side city neighborhoods 3+ miles inland to the lakefront.

Likewise, Chicago has done an excellent job over the past 15 years of creating safe, stable neighborhoods with walkable access to public transportation (L or major bus routes), full-service grocery stores/other necessities, and parks (inland and lakefront). Within the city proper, Chicago has a much higher percentage of high-quality/brick housing (a result of construction quality mandates following the great fire) than Cleveland - which has helped maintain density (more viable rehabs versus tear-downs with vacant lots). There is proof that this gentrification has contributed to further racial and economic segregation in Chicago; but there are still some relatively safe, affordable Chicago neighborhoods. How long this will be the case in Chicago is debatable. Even if the entire stretch of land from roughly W65 eastbound through downtown Cleveland fully gentrified along with an additional 1-2 miles north/west/south of UC, all of North Collinwood, and 1 mile west/south of Shaker Square gentrified - there would still be huge portions of Cleveland viable for low/middle income families (assuming safety concerns addressed) - so gentrification displacement is not a foreseeable problem in Cleveland proper.

On the flip side, Chicago and Illinois politicians are hopelessly corrupt - on a scale far beyond what Cleveland or Ohio will ever likely experience in the future. Of course, this has resulted in the current fiscal status of both Chicago and the state of Illinois becoming a nightmare also on a scale neither Cleveland nor the state of Ohio will likely experience anytime soon. Significant property tax increases in Chicago are an inevitability.

On a relative basis, Cleveland Public Schools have made better decisions over the past decade than Chicago public schools (really, I'm not kidding!). In Chicago, there are a select number of very high performing selective admission middle and high schools - but they are only able to accommodate a small fraction of demand. These schools were put in place to stem suburban flight. The application process for these schools is generally considered more daunting than that for college, and the selection process is highly political. It is common for students ranking in the top 10% not to gain acceptance into even one of these schools. The alternative is typically a mediocre, very expensive catholic high school or leaving for the burbs. While Cleveland schools still have a very high drop-out rate overall, the high-performing and STEM-focused middle and high schools are easily accessible with either a 3.0 or 3.5 GPA - which is totally reasonable; and they provide a suburban-quality education. Plus, additional such schools are being built, so capacity and access from most areas of the city will not be an issue five years from now. This will be a major factor in middle/high income families moving back into the city - along with safety and walkability concerns (once these are resolved over the next 5 years as well.)

Culturally, Cleveland has world-class amenities the envy of cities three times our size. No deficiencies here.

Relative to public transportation, there is need for a multi-modal transportation hub - and I think this will happen. Certainly, there is demand for restored/additional bus routes. Additional light rail won't happen anytime soon given backward state policy. Still, relative to many cities twice our size, Cleveland public transportation is enviable; but Chicago provides a great example to which Cleveland can aspire.