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.
I don’t know what people’s motivations are, but I’m used to some good natured kidding and ribbing between residents of different cities. It’s fun to talk up your own town especially when you can do it at your rival town’s expense….just some good natured ribbing that you expect to get thrown right back at you. But beyond joking around, the question of what city is “better” is kind of stupid. I mean if some anonymous guy from Chicago and his buddies want to bad mouth Cincinnati because it’s filthy, it’s ok with me. I certainly don’t agree, but hey, if it makes them happy when Jennifer Garner trashes the Queen City because its grocery stores are dirty then yuck it up. (And for the record if she really said that, I refuse to believe she meant it….it had to have been some sort of momentary mental collapse…because the Jennifer Garner I imagine knowing would never say anything bad about anybody.)
So, on a more interesting note, what are the different paths you see the three cities being on? While I know there are local differences, I see more similarities than differences certainly between Columbus and Cincinnati.
It's definitely not good natured ribbing here. They are absolutely serious.
Cincinnati feels like it's on an improving trajectory overall, and I feel like one day it could eventually see growth rates more similar to Columbus. It has the urban bones to do this, but it's still too lopsided towards suburban growth outside of the city and Hamilton County. The city needs to do more to fill in all those beautiful mid 19th Century buildings. Right now, census data suggests urban growth is a distant 3rd place among the 3-Cs, but at least there's net growth in the area now. This is kind of the opposite of Columbus, which has the vast majority of its growth focused in the city and in greater Franklin County.
Beyond that, though, I do think Cincinnati is making some good choices in terms of revitalization, like the West End development plan, and I feel like it's quickly losing any remaining Rust Belt reputation. Ohio benefits by having more successful, thriving cities, so it's good to see this happening.
Columbus, IMO, is still on the most positive trajectory, especially economically with all the recent major investments and announcements. It still maintains strong growth and the amount of infill and density increases is relatively strong. It does have some stumbling blocks to overcome, particularly on the housing shortage issue. I know this is not just a local or state one, and despite all that is getting built, Columbus is lagging on building housing and that's creating an increasing affordability issue. Another is building a real transit system, something it has punted on repeatedly. The planned dedicated-lane BRT lines similar to Cleveland's Healthline should definitely help, and if the Amtrak plan to make Columbus a mini-hub of sorts gets funded, it will help even more. It still needs to seriously consider some kind of local rail system too, though, and it doesn't seem like that part is going to happen with current leadership. I suppose the BRT lines could be upgraded to rail at some point, though. I'm not at all concerned with the claims about its lack of cultural amenities because, as others have argued at times, it doesn't really affect the overall trajectory and I think those happen organically overtime with growth anyway.
Cleveland, I don't know, it's kind of a mixed bag. I do think some positive things are happening there, especially in the Downtown- which has had the highest growth of any Ohio downtown- UC and some other areas, but I still think it has a longer way to go to see a true rebirth than most of its defenders want to believe. It has the amenities and some great neighborhoods, but so much of it just feels kind of... tired might be the right word? Unlike Cincinnati more recently, it still very much feels like a post-industrial city that has seen better days. Some people obviously like that vibe, but it doesn't inspire many people to actively move there, and that's what they need to strive for. While I do also feel like its worst days are behind it too, I don't think Cleveland has had good, forward-thinking leadership for a long time and it shows. Cleveland has been a city of gimmicks rather than the neighborhood-building investments that it truly needs. Overall, I feel like it's about 20 years behind where Cincinnati is right now in terms of turning itself around.
So overall, I would say that all 3 are on positive paths, but to very different degrees.
No, I don't, because there is none. Especially when it's not Clevelanders, or Cincinnatians that post things like "... is Columbus the best city in the Midwest" or, as here, "Columbus and Cincinnati, comparing the 2 best metros in Ohio." We in Cleveland don't have to beat the big brass drum of "Hey, look at me, I'm the best."
While I do also feel like its worst days are behind it too, I don't think Cleveland has had good, forward-thinking leadership for a long time and it shows. Cleveland has been a city of gimmicks rather than the neighborhood-building investments that it truly needs. Overall, I feel like it's about 20 years behind where Cincinnati is right now in terms of turning itself around.
I have no idea what you mean by the bolded statement. Maybe you need to visit some of the poorer neighborhoods in Cleveland where investments ... not "gimmicks" have been made. Try Central, where dilapidated, really rundown, and dangerous public housing of the warehouse/near prison block type was replaced by extensive, high-quality townhouses such as Longwood and Garden Valley -- the type of housing, prioritized to prior low/moderate income residents, they can be proud and take care of... The proof is in the pudding. Both properties, now, have been around for a solid 2-plus decades and, still, look as good as new, with well-tended lawns, no trash, well-painted and attended, etc., etc. Try next door, in Hough -- a formerly burned-out shell from 1960s rioting and oppression, now reborn with such extensive, high-quality for-market townhouse projects as Lexington Village or Beacon Place, the latter of which has become a national model with folks like the mayor of Philadelphia coming to town to both praise and emulate Beacon Place back in Philly, as a city that also copied Cleveland in its townhouse-style housing for low-income former residents of the aforementioned horrible public housing.
Then there's the neighboring Fairfax neighborhood, which also happens to be home to the internationally famous Cleveland Clinic. But Fairfax, too, has suffered much blight, abandonment, and decay over the years, but is bouncing back with Medley, a mix-use apartments-over-retail, including a large Meijer's supermarket in what, heretofore, was one of those awful, low-income food deserts. More quality apartment development is going in along with scores of new houses filling in that ugly, saw-tooth appearance of rundown homes standing next to barren lots of demolished homes (and, btw, the homes left standing are being spruced up, now showing off the quality craftsmanship of their oft Victorian heritage.
All these above neighborhoods (including others such as Glenville, Cudell, Collinwood, and others) are making similar progress... No, none are perfect, and still show several warts. But Cleveland is trying... these are no "gimmicks" ... or whatever you're talking about.
And, of course, we don't talk about the absolute success stories such as booming Ohio City, Tremont, Detroit-Shoreway, Larchmere, and Little Italy (and there are others)... All these places are now trendy, historical, pedestrian-oriented, and transit-friendly. And each was (as recent as 30 years ago) dilapidated and full of blight.
So, whatever negative spin you're trying to perpetuate or trying to project Columbus' sheer inferiority complex on Cleveland ... it ain't working, Dude.
... and for the record, I've stated many times how much I enjoy and admire the deep historical, cultural, and architectural beauty of Cincinnati, which has considerably more sway with me than C-Bus.
I have no idea what you mean by the bolded statement. Maybe you need to visit some of the poorer neighborhoods in Cleveland where investments ... not "gimmicks" have been made. Try Central, where dilapidated, really rundown, and dangerous public housing of the warehouse/near prison block type was replaced by extensive, high-quality townhouses such as Longwood and Garden Valley -- the type of housing, prioritized to prior low/moderate income residents, they can be proud and take care of... The proof is in the pudding. Both properties, now, have been around for a solid 2-plus decades and, still, look as good as new, with well-tended lawns, no trash, well-painted and attended, etc., etc. Try next door, in Hough -- a formerly burned-out shell from 1960s rioting and oppression, now reborn with such extensive, high-quality for-market townhouse projects as Lexington Village or Beacon Place, the latter of which has become a national model with folks like the mayor of Philadelphia coming to town to both praise and emulate Beacon Place back in Philly, as a city that also copied Cleveland in its townhouse-style housing for low-income former residents of the aforementioned horrible public housing.
Then there's the neighboring Fairfax neighborhood, which also happens to be home to the internationally famous Cleveland Clinic. But Fairfax, too, has suffered much blight, abandonment, and decay over the years, but is bouncing back with Medley, a mix-use apartments-over-retail, including a large Meijer's supermarket in what, heretofore, was one of those awful, low-income food deserts. More quality apartment development is going in along with scores of new houses filling in that ugly, saw-tooth appearance of rundown homes standing next to barren lots of demolished homes (and, btw, the homes left standing are being spruced up, now showing off the quality craftsmanship of their oft Victorian heritage.
All these above neighborhoods (including others such as Glenville, Cudell, Collinwood, and others) are making similar progress... No, none are perfect, and still show several warts. But Cleveland is trying... these are no "gimmicks" ... or whatever you're talking about.
And, of course, we don't talk about the absolute success stories such as booming Ohio City, Tremont, Detroit-Shoreway, Larchmere, and Little Italy (and there are others)... All these places are now trendy, historical, pedestrian-oriented, and transit-friendly. And each was (as recent as 30 years ago) dilapidated and full of blight.
So, whatever negative spin you're trying to perpetuate or trying to project Columbus' sheer inferiority complex on Cleveland ... it ain't working, Dude.
... and for the record, I've stated many times how much I enjoy and admire the deep historical, cultural, and architectural beauty of Cincinnati, which has considerably more sway with me than C-Bus.
honestly no clue what he could think is "gimmicky" about Cleveland. Makes zero sense whatsoever.
Cincinnati feels like it's on an improving trajectory overall, and I feel like one day it could eventually see growth rates more similar to Columbus. It has the urban bones to do this, but it's still too lopsided towards suburban growth outside of the city and Hamilton County. The city needs to do more to fill in all those beautiful mid 19th Century buildings. Right now, census data suggests urban growth is a distant 3rd place among the 3-Cs, but at least there's net growth in the area now. This is kind of the opposite of Columbus, which has the vast majority of its growth focused in the city and in greater Franklin County. Beyond that, though, I do think Cincinnati is making some good choices in terms of revitalization, like the West End development plan, and I feel like it's quickly losing any remaining Rust Belt reputation. Ohio benefits by having more successful, thriving cities, so it's good to see this happening.
Just a quick update here. Ive been in Cincinnati since 2010 and worked downtown, Clifton, Northside, etc in the construction industry. Im a lead carpenter and project manager. Cincinnati is actually a stellar example of redeveloping urban neighborhoods and particurlarly the urban core of downtown and over the rhine. Like most cities, over the decades, Cincinnati did concentrate on suburban development as nobody ever wanted to invest in the urban core except section 8 landlords that kept tenemant housing from falling into shambles. Those days are long dead and theres copious development downtown and surroounding neighborhoods. Granted covid slowed things down a bit, but the rebound is in full effect. Theres authors who have cited Cincinnati as an example of the right moves to make for a failing city and as someone who has seen it first hand and contributed hands on, he isnt wrong.
It's definitely not good natured ribbing here. They are absolutely serious.
Cincinnati feels like it's on an improving trajectory overall, and I feel like one day it could eventually see growth rates more similar to Columbus. It has the urban bones to do this, but it's still too lopsided towards suburban growth outside of the city and Hamilton County. The city needs to do more to fill in all those beautiful mid 19th Century buildings. Right now, census data suggests urban growth is a distant 3rd place among the 3-Cs, but at least there's net growth in the area now. This is kind of the opposite of Columbus, which has the vast majority of its growth focused in the city and in greater Franklin County.
Beyond that, though, I do think Cincinnati is making some good choices in terms of revitalization, like the West End development plan, and I feel like it's quickly losing any remaining Rust Belt reputation. Ohio benefits by having more successful, thriving cities, so it's good to see this happening.
Columbus, IMO, is still on the most positive trajectory, especially economically with all the recent major investments and announcements. It still maintains strong growth and the amount of infill and density increases is relatively strong. It does have some stumbling blocks to overcome, particularly on the housing shortage issue. I know this is not just a local or state one, and despite all that is getting built, Columbus is lagging on building housing and that's creating an increasing affordability issue. Another is building a real transit system, something it has punted on repeatedly. The planned dedicated-lane BRT lines similar to Cleveland's Healthline should definitely help, and if the Amtrak plan to make Columbus a mini-hub of sorts gets funded, it will help even more. It still needs to seriously consider some kind of local rail system too, though, and it doesn't seem like that part is going to happen with current leadership. I suppose the BRT lines could be upgraded to rail at some point, though. I'm not at all concerned with the claims about its lack of cultural amenities because, as others have argued at times, it doesn't really affect the overall trajectory and I think those happen organically overtime with growth anyway.
Cleveland, I don't know, it's kind of a mixed bag. I do think some positive things are happening there, especially in the Downtown- which has had the highest growth of any Ohio downtown- UC and some other areas, but I still think it has a longer way to go to see a true rebirth than most of its defenders want to believe. It has the amenities and some great neighborhoods, but so much of it just feels kind of... tired might be the right word? Unlike Cincinnati more recently, it still very much feels like a post-industrial city that has seen better days. Some people obviously like that vibe, but it doesn't inspire many people to actively move there, and that's what they need to strive for. While I do also feel like its worst days are behind it too, I don't think Cleveland has had good, forward-thinking leadership for a long time and it shows. Cleveland has been a city of gimmicks rather than the neighborhood-building investments that it truly needs. Overall, I feel like it's about 20 years behind where Cincinnati is right now in terms of turning itself around.
So overall, I would say that all 3 are on positive paths, but to very different degrees.
Interesting….thanks for the perspective. When I think of the city (or cities), I think if they’re very genetically. I think of Blue Ash, Greenhills, Finneytown, Loveland as Cincinnati. Same for the Columbus and Cleveland. My familiarity with all three cities is really the suburbs….and that might be why I see them more similar than different.
No, I don't, because there is none. Especially when it's not Clevelanders, or Cincinnatians that post things like "... is Columbus the best city in the Midwest" or, as here, "Columbus and Cincinnati, comparing the 2 best metros in Ohio." We in Cleveland don't have to beat the big brass drum of "Hey, look at me, I'm the best."
Yet here you are, doing exactly that. You're not bashing Columbus without context, you're doing it directly in comparison to a city you prefer. You all are. Otherwise, why even care what someone says about Columbus? Why come to this forum at all? It has nothing to do with setting the record straight or whatever you all tell yourselves. You manifest the exact type of insecurity you all project onto others regarding Columbus. And it's all so stupid.
I have no idea what you mean by the bolded statement. Maybe you need to visit some of the poorer neighborhoods in Cleveland where investments ... not "gimmicks" have been made. Try Central, where dilapidated, really rundown, and dangerous public housing of the warehouse/near prison block type was replaced by extensive, high-quality townhouses such as Longwood and Garden Valley -- the type of housing, prioritized to prior low/moderate income residents, they can be proud and take care of... The proof is in the pudding. Both properties, now, have been around for a solid 2-plus decades and, still, look as good as new, with well-tended lawns, no trash, well-painted and attended, etc., etc. Try next door, in Hough -- a formerly burned-out shell from 1960s rioting and oppression, now reborn with such extensive, high-quality for-market townhouse projects as Lexington Village or Beacon Place, the latter of which has become a national model with folks like the mayor of Philadelphia coming to town to both praise and emulate Beacon Place back in Philly, as a city that also copied Cleveland in its townhouse-style housing for low-income former residents of the aforementioned horrible public housing.
Then there's the neighboring Fairfax neighborhood, which also happens to be home to the internationally famous Cleveland Clinic. But Fairfax, too, has suffered much blight, abandonment, and decay over the years, but is bouncing back with Medley, a mix-use apartments-over-retail, including a large Meijer's supermarket in what, heretofore, was one of those awful, low-income food deserts. More quality apartment development is going in along with scores of new houses filling in that ugly, saw-tooth appearance of rundown homes standing next to barren lots of demolished homes (and, btw, the homes left standing are being spruced up, now showing off the quality craftsmanship of their oft Victorian heritage.
All these above neighborhoods (including others such as Glenville, Cudell, Collinwood, and others) are making similar progress... No, none are perfect, and still show several warts. But Cleveland is trying... these are no "gimmicks" ... or whatever you're talking about.
And, of course, we don't talk about the absolute success stories such as booming Ohio City, Tremont, Detroit-Shoreway, Larchmere, and Little Italy (and there are others)... All these places are now trendy, historical, pedestrian-oriented, and transit-friendly. And each was (as recent as 30 years ago) dilapidated and full of blight.
So, whatever negative spin you're trying to perpetuate or trying to project Columbus' sheer inferiority complex on Cleveland ... it ain't working, Dude.
... and for the record, I've stated many times how much I enjoy and admire the deep historical, cultural, and architectural beauty of Cincinnati, which has considerably more sway with me than C-Bus.
I'm sure Cleveland has made some investments, but my argument is that it's not enough. By gimmicks, I mean the long-standing focus on big, flashy stuff, but not enough of what matters to most people. For example, why do Clevelanders here put *so* much focus on Cleveland's cultural or institutional amenities rather than anything else? Because that's its strength and you all keep falling back on it. Can you talk about safety? No, because it's one of the most dangerous cities in the country for crime. Can you talk about schools? No, because they're as bad or worse than other urban school districts. Can you talk about efforts between the city, county and suburbs to support a better region? Nope, and if anything, that's a competitive, rather than collaborative relationship. Can you talk about how large swaths of the city are seeing revitalization? No, not really. You can certainly point to some progress here and there, but I would argue compared to its closest peer in Ohio- Cincinnati- and other cities in the Midwest, it's not doing anything particularly groundbreaking and is probably even lagging behind. Every major city in the US is seeing urban revitalization to some extent, after all. I'm not seeing anything that sets Cleveland's apart, and I actually care about and follow this stuff. If I'm not seeing it, do you think the average non-Clevelander is?
"Inferior" is not a word I've used to describe Cleveland, though, and won't. I am just stating what I think are some issues holding it back from reaching its greater potential. Unlike how some of you feel about Columbus, I don't think Cleveland's success comes at the expense of anywhere else, so I have no irrational need to see it fail. I want it to thrive and I am rooting for it even as you all root against Central Ohio.
Interesting….thanks for the perspective. When I think of the city (or cities), I think if they’re very genetically. I think of Blue Ash, Greenhills, Finneytown, Loveland as Cincinnati. Same for the Columbus and Cleveland. My familiarity with all three cities is really the suburbs….and that might be why I see them more similar than different.
Suburbs in America all basically look the same, that's for sure.
Yet here you are, doing exactly that. You're not bashing Columbus without context, you're doing it directly in comparison to a city you prefer.
Correction. I'm "bashing" Columbus; I actually lived there and spoke from direct knowledge and didn't like it. It's my right, just as it's yours to not like Cleveland, which you apparently don't. But try and engage in facts, not nonsensical non-sequiturs such as Cleveland neighborhood restoration is "gimmickry" and not a matter of deep investment with an eye toward positive change. And no, it's not just me, it's a whole lot of people who feel Columbus is overblown/overrated and, just as I saw, directly, when I lived there: C-Bus people always had a chip on their shoulders; always putting Cleveland down to try and boost up their egos. And C-D threads like these, and other similar ones, indicate that mentality among Columbusites still hasn't gone away.
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.
