Chicago more like 3 biggest East Coast cities OR 3 biggest Midwest cities (Wilmette: zoning, eat)

[kpl1228]

Chicago, Baltimore, Philly, Detroit, Cleveland (and to some extent Pittsburgh) are so unique they really are their own creatures, particularly Baltimore.
However, Cleveland and Chicago have MANY parallels other than sheer numbers. Political, weather, educational, scientific, historical, industrial, cultural, racial, sociological, philanthropic. And certainly the tradition and "quality" of their sports teams.

[moneymkt]

Originally Posted by personone

Disagree with this. Chicago is undoubtably the most “east coast”- like city in the Midwest, much moreso than Cleveland. I have lived in Philly and am from the east coast. Granted, I am not too familiar with Cleveland, but downtown and the north side of Chicago resemble a major east coast city more than anywhere else in the Midwest. From the high rise apartments to the brownstones/greystones, to the way the L/ CTA hovers in the backdrop. Chicago reminds me a lot of Philly, both at the downtown and neighborhood level (especially the north side, but even the near west side too). Have only been to Cleveland once and didn’t get too far outside downtown, but it had a quintessentially Midwest feel, and driving there felt very rural Midwest near city limits. In no way does it feel more “east coast” than Chicago.

My friend sent me a picture of a section in downtown chicago and I thought it was 15th and Market

[EddieOlSkool]

Most city downtowns look similar. When driving along downtown Cincinnati one can also see similarities to Pittsburgh and Philly. Elsewhere where people actually live is a different story.

On that same subject, Baltimore is similar to Pittsburgh. Pittsburgh is similar to Cincinnati. Baltimore is also similar to Philly. Then people say Cleveland is similar to Pittsburgh. All in all Rust Belt cities all share commonalities.

[personone]

Originally Posted by kpl1228

Chicago, Baltimore, Philly, Detroit, Cleveland (and to some extent Pittsburgh) are so unique they really are their own creatures, particularly Baltimore.
However, Cleveland and Chicago have MANY parallels other than sheer numbers. Political, weather, educational, scientific, historical, industrial, cultural, racial, sociological, philanthropic. And certainly the tradition and "quality" of their sports teams.

I agree with some of this, but not all. Chicago and Cleveland don't seem that similar to me. Part of the differences is from the sheer size difference, but culturally they are not very similar IMO. There is no ethnic group in Cleveland like Polish in Chicago which is equivalent to Italian Americans in NY/NJ. Chicago has has the 3rd or 4th largest Hispanic population at metro level (mostly Mexican, but also the 5th largest Puerto Rican population). There are no equivalents to these size populations in Cleveland.

At the downtown level, Chicago is in a league of its own. Our downtown is so unique, and it certainly has no resemblances to Cleveland. Chicago has one of the larger and more authentic Chinatowns in the country. There is no equivalent to this Cleveland. Areas like Ukranian village (and a large Ukranian population), Devon (little india/Pakistan), Humbolt park (Puerto Ricans), Pilsen/Little village (Mexican)....there are no equivalents to this in Cleveland.

The CTA/metro system in Chicago is unlike anything in Cleveland. The beaches along Lake Michigan. In Cleveland, you can't find the kind of high rise housing or brownstone/greystone housing that you will see on the north side/ near west side. The list can go on and on for the differences between the two cities.

Not saying they are no similarities. The African American populations probably share many similarities, and the south side of Chicago definitely has a more Midwest feel (from factories to housing style, etc), so you will likely see some similarities there.

Bottom line, Chicago and Cleveland are very different cities. They share a few similarities, but many differences.

[EddieOlSkool]

I have actually had people tell me the South Side of Chicago has a more New England feel akin to cities like Hartford and other places in Western New England. The logic behind this was the gritty industrial feel of neighborhoods like South Chicago, South Deering, and East Side (all South Side neighborhoods). Thoughts?

My personal opinion is the South Side is very Rust Belt feeling so it can be compared to places like Detroit, Cleveland, Pittsburgh, Buffalo, etc. I agree more with the South Side just having a generic Rust Belt feel. For example places like Bridgeport aren't so different from the majority of the Rust Belt cities.

[Vlajos]

Naperville is similar to Indianapolis, Columbus, and Kansas Cit. Chicago isn't.

[Irishtom29]

Originally Posted by EddieOlSkool

I have actually had people tell me the South Side of Chicago has a more New England feel akin to cities like Hartford and other places in Western New England. The logic behind this was the gritty industrial feel of neighborhoods like South Chicago, South Deering, and East Side (all South Side neighborhoods). Thoughts?

My personal opinion is the South Side is very Rust Belt feeling so it can be compared to places like Detroit, Cleveland, Pittsburgh, Buffalo, etc. I agree more with the South Side just having a generic Rust Belt feel. For example places like Bridgeport aren't so different from the majority of the Rust Belt cities.

I can tell you that in my day (I retired 15 years ago) we Local 1 boilermakers (most of whom in my day were South Siders or suburbanites with South Side roots, I was the only West Side Irish guy in the then largely Irish local) had boilermakers from all over the country come work out of our hall and there was a definite feeling of commonality with hands from Detroit, Cleveland, Hammond, Pittsburg, Philadelphia and Boston, more so than with hands from down south or out west. But we were closest with the hands from Peoria—being from Illinois trumped all else.

[personone]

Originally Posted by Irishtom29

I can tell you that in my day (I retired 15 years ago) we Local 1 boilermakers (most of whom in my day were South Siders or suburbanites with South Side roots, I was the only West Side Irish guy in the then largely Irish local) had boilermakers from all over the country come work out of our hall and there was a definite feeling of commonality with hands from Detroit, Cleveland, Hammond, Pittsburg, Philadelphia and Boston, more so than with hands from down south or out west. But we were closest with the hands from Peoria—being from Illinois trumped all else.

Interesting. Chicago's large and prominent Irish population, and related culture, traditions, and history in the city is another characteristic it shares with many large east coast cities.

[MassVt]

You can see remnants of the Northeast in neighborhoods around Wrigley and other areas, but there's still a separating distinction--space. Perhaps if there the 1871 fire not occurred, there would be more similarities, but since it did happen, and building trends changed with it, Chicago is somewhat distinct from East Coast cities.

[Bluefox]

Originally Posted by MassVt

You can see remnants of the Northeast in neighborhoods around Wrigley and other areas, but there's still a separating distinction--space. Perhaps if there the 1871 fire not occurred, there would be more similarities, but since it did happen, and building trends changed with it, Chicago is somewhat distinct from East Coast cities.

Yeah, I do sometimes wonder what Chicago would look like today had the fire not occurred. I don’t know if it would look better or worse, but there would certainly still be many more historic buildings and probably would look a bit more like an East Coast city.