Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The lakefront trail is a crowded sidewalk alongside a lake. Chicago arguably has the least opportunity for outdoor recreation among the 50 biggest cities in the US and I think almost nobody seriously argues to the contrary. People who love Chicago love the whole "life indoors" kind of motif. Some call it lethargy and I guess Chicago people would call it a vibe, but it's impossible to look at what even most Midwestern metros offer and suggest that a sidewalk along a lake is even marginally comparable.
Please...I know Chicago, and there are numerous opportunities to enjoy the outdoors. Your dislike for the city doesn't mean everyone else feels the same. Still, the number 3 city in the country, and one of my very favorites. Don't diminish the opportunities provided by a stunning Lake Michigan shoreline...it's a treasure that very few cities have.
Problem with Chicago is the natural amenities outside of Lake Michigan is the absolute pits. It’s still a great city but a lot of the younger professional class enjoy hiking and skiing and it’s really hard to do both in Chicago. I don’t think crime is the real answer as there are many places to live in Chicago not even counting the suburbs where your risks of being a victim of crime is incredibly low.
I don't think this is really why Chicago has lost relevance; DC, NYC, and Boston are still quite popular with the young gentry class. (Arguably these cities have all lost relevance too, just not as much)
It's the reputation for crime more than the reality. Indianapolis frequently gets higher homicide counts per capita, but it has a reputation as an affordable, boring, family-friendly city. We're seeing this play out in other cities with the funneling of people out of e.g. Portland (which is still fairly safe on a national scale)
I agree. Nashville will have another transit referendum within the next year or two. The city seems to be following a similar path as Austin as they’ve had a transit referendum that didn’t pass in the mid 2000’s
It's now 2023 and where is Austins lrt planning? It doesn't happen overnight.
It's now 2023 and where is Austins lrt planning? It doesn't happen overnight.
Austin’s transit referendum passed in 2020, which includes both LRT and expanded busses. Looks like they actually had two prior transit plans that failed, one in 2000 and another in 2014.
Interestingly enough you singled out Nashville’s infrastructure issues but failed to mention Austin’s infrastructure woes are just as bad if not worse than the other cities mentioned as Austin only has one interstate highway that runs through the city.
The positive note is that they’ve finally voted to get their transit situation together and looks like actions to resolve this is in place.
Austin’s transit referendum passed in 2020, which includes both LRT and expanded busses. Looks like they actually had two prior transit plans that failed, one in 2000 and another in 2014. Interestingly enough you singled out Nashville’s infrastructure issues but failed to mentioned Austin’s infrastructure woes are just as bad if not worse than the other cities mention as Austin only have one interstate highway that runs through the city.
The positive note is that they’ve finally voted to get their transit situation together and looks like actions to resolve this is in place.
I know these lrt lines don't get built overnight. Especially when there are talks about tunnels and everything. There are many other cities that have funding in place, routes chosen and still won't see anything open for another 10 years or so.
I know these lrt lines don't get built overnight. Especially when there are talks about tunnels and everything. There are many other cities that have funding in place, routes chosen and still won't see anything open for another 10 years or so.
Of course no comprehensive transit plan is built overnight. That goes without saying but the key is steps are being put in place. Gotta start somewhere. In Nashville’s case if a transit referendum does move forward in the next few years then that’s steps to getting things done.
It's now 2023 and where is Austins lrt planning? It doesn't happen overnight.
LOL, welcome to America's new relevant superstar cities, Austin and Nashville.
Surely great places for a night on the town, but as far as having the basic infrastructure that the average world citizen would expect to see in any city.....yeah they might need a few more decades to get that sorted out!
I don't think this is really why Chicago has lost relevance; DC, NYC, and Boston are still quite popular with the young gentry class. (Arguably these cities have all lost relevance too, just not as much)
No. NYC and Boston offer way more in natural amenities than Chicago. It's not even close. For both NYC and Boston, you can ski within driving distance. Boston has Cape Cod within a weekend trip and some decent trails even within the city (Blue Hills, Fells) and NH and Vermont are drivable. NYC has Long Island too and the Hudson Valley is beautiful. I can't speak for DC area as I've never lived there, but I imagine it being better than Chicago just on proximity to Shenandoah alone.
Chicago has Lake Michigan and that's it. Its forest preserves are some of the lamest hikes I've ever done in the US.
I love Chicago the city, but the natural amenities of the metro area are the pits. It's not controversial except to the biggest homers.
No. NYC and Boston offer way more in natural amenities than Chicago. It's not even close. For both NYC and Boston, you can ski within driving distance. Boston has Cape Cod within a weekend trip and some decent trails even within the city (Blue Hills, Fells) and NH and Vermont are drivable. NYC has Long Island too and the Hudson Valley is beautiful. I can't speak for DC area as I've never lived there, but I imagine it being better than Chicago just on proximity to Shenandoah alone.
No disagreement there, but how many people are really moving to NYC and Boston to hike in Vermont once a year? As far as the eastern US goes I think the only areas people really move to for the natural amenities are like, western NC/east TN, northern New England, and like Florida if you count the warm weather as an amenity.
Abandonment looks a lot worse than poverty though. A lot of New England cities (like say Worcester, Providence, Springfield) have a lot of poverty but maintained 70-85% of their peak population. As a result bad neighborhoods in Providence look like the houses need a paint job or a railing fixed. While large swaths of St Louis are blocks with like 4 houses left intact in them
I remember when most of those blocks had houses on them, traveling into the city via the Lewis & Clark Expressway (I-70) after a cross-state trip.
One of the things I point out about my hometown of Kansas City is: Had the city not annexed some 250 square miles of corn and soybeans over 30-odd years after World War II, the city would very closely resemble St. Louis in its trajectory: it would have reached its peak population in 1950 (456,622) and lost nearly half of it afterwards, thanks in large part to the depopulation of the old heavily Black section and its reversion to prairie. Instead of a city of a little more than half a million now, we'd be talking about one of about 250k.
Kansas City's population growth and continuing sprawl means it has had a slightly better growth trajectory than St. Louis since 1980 or so; as Lawrence and the Kansas side of the metro have grown towards each other, the home of the University of Kansas is now within the expanded metropolis (CSA), and that might give a boost to the area's educational profile (KU's medical and nursing schools have been in Kansas City (Kan.) since their creation ~1905).
In terms of importance, one of KC's issues of long standing is that it has historically been a branch-plant rather than headquarters city. It may now be home to the two (or two of the three) largest banks based in Missouri, but that wasn't always the case; the largest company now based there (Hallmark) is privately owned, and most of the others that were (Cerner, Russell Stover...) have either been acquired by companies based outside it or (Farmland Industries, the nation's largest farmer co-op) dismembered themselves; the meatpacking houses that handled the cattle and hogs that came through the nation's second-largest stockyards (after Chicago) were all based in the Windy City; a good chunk of the city's job base when I was growing up came from its role as a major regional center for Federal Government agencies; the city ranked second to Detroit in car and truck assembly, a status that began with the opening of the first branch auto assembly plant in the country (a Ford plant) in 1912; and so on.
But because the city might be considered the nation's biggest also-ran, I'm not sure its importance will fade in the way those other river cities' have. It will continue to be the second choice of many, who will likely fall for it should they end up passing their first choice by.
Last edited by MarketStEl; 05-08-2023 at 06:24 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
