Ohio 2018: more important TODAY-->Cincinnati, Cleveland, or Columbus? (Lorain: insurance, theater)

[bjimmy24]

Originally Posted by jbcmh81

About as many times as Clevelanders mention the lakefront or Playhouse Square. So basically, this could go on indefinitely. Face it, I called how this was going to turn out from the beginning, because it's always the same conversation. I wasn't even involved for most of it.

But that's also not really how the conversation has been going. You are trying to inject this back into it where it wasn't.

Self-fulfilling prophecy seems to be your calling card.

[jbcmh81]

Originally Posted by Losfrisco

It's also kind of incredible that Columbus, whose urban juggernaut and population boom the world hasn't seen since New York and Berlin in the previous century, sat idle for 150 years as a college football town. Of course, none of the recent expansion would have anything to do with massive annexation, so I guess we'll never know what happened.

Sarcasm aside, it is an verifiable, empirical fact that Columbus is an older city than Cleveland. Saying that Columbus is "new" is just a complete revisionist dodge.

Columbus's growth has been steady, not explosive. It was never a boom city and still isn't. Anyone who says differently is the same type of person who thinks people should be flocking to Cleveland for its symphony. As far as annexation, I'm sure you know that hasn't been a real factor in its growth since the 1970s.


Columbus was founded in 1812, and fully incorporated in 1816. Franklinton is Central Ohio's oldest community, and was started in 1797, but was just a tiny village even by the time it was annexed in 1859, mostly due to the fact that it repeatedly flooded.
Cleveland was founded in 1796 and incorporated in 1814.
Either way, Cleveland is older. Age alone doesn't explain the different development patterns, though. That's a long discussion, and one that I don't think this particular forum is capable of having.

[jbcmh81]

Originally Posted by bjimmy24

But that's also not really how the conversation has been going. You are trying to inject this back into it where it wasn't.

Self-fulfilling prophecy seems to be your calling card.

The thread was pretty deep in a bunch of Clevelanders and other Columbus haters finding ways to call it inferior. Isn't that how all of these 3-C conversations go here? You're going to try to honestly deny that? The only difference lately is Cincinnati folks don't even bother getting involved anymore. I barely post here myself these days. It's a Cleveland-centric forum and always has been.

[ferraris]

Let's put a positive spin on this; it's wonderful that Ohio even has this many cities to be arguing about. Ohio is somewhat unusual in that it's not mostly rural and also is not dominated by one or two cities/regions. Only Florida and maybe Texas are similar in my view.

Counting top 50 MSAs per state, Ohio with 3 is only behind California (6), Florida (4), and Texas (4).

Counting top 100 MSAs per state, Ohio with 6 is only behind California (10), Florida (9), and tied with Texas (6). And Youngstown just misses the cut at rank 101.

So really, no single city in Ohio is most important. Ohio has a healthy amount of important cities spread throughout the state, without any one or two of them being overwhelmingly dominant.

[Losfrisco]

Originally Posted by jbcmh81

Columbus's growth has been steady, not explosive. It was never a boom city and still isn't. Anyone who says differently is the same type of person who thinks people should be flocking to Cleveland for its symphony. As far as annexation, I'm sure you know that hasn't been a real factor in its growth since the 1970s.


Columbus was founded in 1812, and fully incorporated in 1816. Franklinton is Central Ohio's oldest community, and was started in 1797, but was just a tiny village even by the time it was annexed in 1859, mostly due to the fact that it repeatedly flooded.
Cleveland was founded in 1796 and incorporated in 1814.
Either way, Cleveland is older. Age alone doesn't explain the different development patterns, though. That's a long discussion, and one that I don't think this particular forum is capable of having.

"With a population of 3,500, Columbus was officially chartered as a city on March 3, 1834"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Columbus%2C_Ohio

"This key link between the Ohio River and the Great Lakes connected the city to the Atlantic Ocean via the Erie Canal and Hudson River, and later via the St. Lawrence Seaway. Its products could reach markets on the Gulf of Mexico via the Mississippi River. Growth continued with added railroad links.[14] Cleveland incorporated as a city in 1836"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cleveland

As I said, Columbus was incorporated as a municipality before Cleveland.

[jbcmh81]

Originally Posted by Losfrisco

"With a population of 3,500, Columbus was officially chartered as a city on March 3, 1834"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Columbus%2C_Ohio

"This key link between the Ohio River and the Great Lakes connected the city to the Atlantic Ocean via the Erie Canal and Hudson River, and later via the St. Lawrence Seaway. Its products could reach markets on the Gulf of Mexico via the Mississippi River. Growth continued with added railroad links.[14] Cleveland incorporated as a city in 1836"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cleveland

As I said, Columbus was incorporated as a municipality before Cleveland.

This is semantics, and it's boring. Cleveland is older. It was founded first. Everyone knows that. When it became a *city* is different. But soldier on. This kind of stuff is why I spend more and more of my time elsewhere.

[bjimmy24]

Originally Posted by jbcmh81

The thread was pretty deep in a bunch of Clevelanders and other Columbus haters finding ways to call it inferior. Isn't that how all of these 3-C conversations go here? You're going to try to honestly deny that? The only difference lately is Cincinnati folks don't even bother getting involved anymore. I barely post here myself these days. It's a Cleveland-centric forum and always has been.

No I'm not denying there is a lot of trash talk on this forum, it just seemed like it was gone and then you brought it back. I would love to be able to talk about Ohio without having to constantly make fun of other places.

[bjimmy24]

Originally Posted by jbcmh81

This is semantics, and it's boring. Cleveland is older. It was founded first. Everyone knows that. When it became a *city* is different. But soldier on. This kind of stuff is why I spend more and more of my time elsewhere.

Exactly

[tlb919]

Originally Posted by pontiac51

And as much as Columbus has developed over the last 50 years, Cleveland is STILL much more developed than Columbus is. Cleveland’s built-up area extends way into adjacent counties while Columbus’ built-up area barely gets past the outerbelt. And while Columbus has grown tremendously over the last 50 years, it is still a farm metropolitan area. One can make the argument that farm counties such as Madison, Pickaway and others in the region have very little to with the Columbus area whereas Summit, Lorain, Lake, Medina, Portage and even Geauga counties all contain Cleveland suburbs. This is why it can take upwards of an hour to drive through Cleveland on the highways and only 20 minutes to drive through Columbus. This is in part due to the fact that there are farms/open fields within 7 miles of Downtown Columbus. So the bottom line is that Columbus has a long way to go development-wise to catch Cleveland or Cincinnati. If you need more evidence, take a look at a satellite map. It’s not even close!!

It will never cease to amaze me how many Cleveland people on this forum make this argument while without taking a breath, knock down Columbus for sprawl. I get it, Columbus annexed A LOT... in the 1970s. I do not get how Columbus is a "Farm Metro" while boasting about Cleveland sprawling into multiple counties. You're not taking into account how each the city itself it built.

Cleveland - Built against a Lake meaning it sprawls along the lake. East to West Cleveland takes and hour to get through, however North to South is about 15 minutes.

Columbus - Inland city meaning it is built radial. East to West Columbus tends to run about 20 minutes to travel, while North to South tends to to be about 40 minutes.

The reality is that Metro Columbus and Metro Cleveland are just built/developed very differently. Columbus is able to build in every direction leading to a much more compact metro while Cleveland was forced to follow the lake. These patterns have literally nothing to do with the importance of the cities today. Debate all you want about the each cities importance, but bringing up satellite maps and time to drive through means absolutely nothing.

[jbcmh81]

Originally Posted by bjimmy24

No I'm not denying there is a lot of trash talk on this forum, it just seemed like it was gone and then you brought it back. I would love to be able to talk about Ohio without having to constantly make fun of other places.

In complete honesty, no sarcasm- I like Cleveland, I've said that many times. I don't particularly like the posters here from Cleveland, though. We can't have a serious discussion about the city and its real pros and cons. Same with Columbus, but for different reasons as there are almost no posters from Columbus and any discussion about it almost always devolves into the "it's inferior in every way to..." Just kind of gets old. I really enjoy talking about city issues, but man do Ohioans make it difficult to talk about their own cities in any constructive way.