Will Columbus become largest Ohio metro? (Cleveland, Cincinnati: top neighborhood, photos, maps)

[cheech14]

Originally Posted by bjimmy24

yes exactly 10% of a city in one neighborhood is actually a massive percentage. it’s very representative of the entire city at large beyond it’s borders, much more so than german village. this is obvious and frankly the poster, who has been around for a while, is bad faith. he wants to have a discussion about what? how 10% of the population isn’t that much? about how much people travel? it’s ridiculous.

So we should judge all cities by their worst 10%? Do you really want to do that with other Ohio cities, because I'm not sure any of them would look very good.

Sorry, what poster am I supposed to be?

[cheech14]

Originally Posted by TomJones123

Perhaps realtors stalk the forums to steer the conversation to selling homes in c-bus...totally making that up BTW...

Definitely not a realtor. I once interviewed to be one... in 2007. Needles to say, it didn't work out at the time.

[Losfrisco]

Originally Posted by cheech14

Is there any evidence that annexation was caused by a desire to be a "big city"? It seems like it was because of water rights and a fear that they would eventually get boxed in by suburbs and face a financial crisis with falling tax revenues. I don't think bragging rights or size had anything to do with it.

What are we really considering to be a good neighborhood in this debate? What are the characteristics that we should be judging that? If we had an established set of guidelines, that would go a long way in determining what does and doesn't match.

The lesson of Columbus, Ohio is that there are no shortcuts to being a major metropolitan city. You have to put the work in.

Hey lets annex these rural towns to consolidate revenue. Maybe someday we'll get around to making those newly annexed places look somewhat city-like. (40 years later)....Nahhhh, things are good enough as it is, after all-we're the biggest city in Ohio by far!

When you see a vacant part of Cleveland or Detroit, you know at one point it was bustling and built up.

When you see this in Columbus:

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9156...8192?entry=ttu

You know it was annexed as part of a lazy, half baked scheme with no intention of any development.

[TomJones123]

Originally Posted by Losfrisco

When you see this in Columbus:

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9156...8192?entry=ttu

You know it was annexed as part of a lazy, half baked scheme with no intention of any development.

Thats the type of under-development Im talking about.

[cheech14]

Originally Posted by Losfrisco

The lesson of Columbus, Ohio is that there are no shortcuts to being a major metropolitan city. You have to put the work in.

Hey lets annex these rural towns to consolidate revenue. Maybe someday we'll get around to making those newly annexed places look somewhat city-like. (40 years later)....Nahhhh, things are good enough as it is, after all-we're the biggest city in Ohio by far!

When you see a vacant part of Cleveland or Detroit, you know at one point it was bustling and built up.

When you see this in Columbus:

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9156...8192?entry=ttu

You know it was annexed as part of a lazy, half baked scheme with no intention of any development.

Cleveland and Detroit didn't annex and let themselves get surrounded, and it hurt them in the long run. As Tom said, annexation worked. Yeah, that means that some of the places within the boundary are fairly empty pieces of land, but I imagine they will take their decades of stable economic fortunes over what the alternative was.

I have seen that Columbus is getting ready to change its codes. Hopefully it will be smart about it and write some new ones that encourage better development throughout.

[bjimmy24]

Originally Posted by cheech14

So we should judge all cities by their worst 10%? Do you really want to do that with other Ohio cities, because I'm not sure any of them would look very good.

Sorry, what poster am I supposed to be?

it's not the worst 10%, it's the largest neighborhood. in cleveland i believe old brooklyn is the largest neighborhood. i think OB is a pretty fair barometer of the city overall.

[cheech14]

Originally Posted by bjimmy24

it's not the worst 10%, it's the largest neighborhood. in cleveland i believe old brooklyn is the largest neighborhood. i think OB is a pretty fair barometer of the city overall.

Yeah, I imagine it does at 78 square miles. But you still did say 10% of the Columbus is representatitve of all of Columbus.

[bjimmy24]

Originally Posted by cheech14

Yeah, I imagine it does at 78 square miles. But you still did say 10% of the Columbus is representatitve of all of Columbus.

Let's go check the record!

Northland is however the largest neighborhood in Columbus at nearly 100k people so imo it's a good barometer of what the city is like for the most amount of people.

Yes, Northland is much more representative of the city of Columbus than Olde Towne East (5k) or German Village (4k) or Victorian Village (4k) or Short North (2k). Do you think many people know that this core area only has an actual population of about 15-20k? I would bet most people have no idea. Hilltop meanwhile comes in at 70k, Northland at 100k. I consider Northland and Hilltop relatively similar. Hell even Far South is more than twice as populated as the central core.

My point is that people want to talk about Columbus as if it's one big German Village and just a bustling quaint beautiful metropolis. It is not. The difference between what you see as a visitor and what you see as an actual resident is massive.

[bjimmy24]

Originally Posted by cheech14

Cleveland and Detroit didn't annex and let themselves get surrounded, and it hurt them in the long run. As Tom said, annexation worked. Yeah, that means that some of the places within the boundary are fairly empty pieces of land, but I imagine they will take their decades of stable economic fortunes over what the alternative was.

I have seen that Columbus is getting ready to change its codes. Hopefully it will be smart about it and write some new ones that encourage better development throughout.

Not annexing enough probably comes in around #41 of the top problems those cities had that lead to population loss.

[cheech14]

Originally Posted by bjimmy24

Let's go check the record!

Yes, Northland is much more representative of the city of Columbus than Olde Towne East (5k) or German Village (4k) or Victorian Village (4k) or Short North (2k). Do you think many people know that this core area only has an actual population of about 15-20k? I would bet most people have no idea. Hilltop meanwhile comes in at 70k, Northland at 100k. I consider Northland and Hilltop relatively similar. Hell even Far South is more than twice as populated as the central core.

My point is that people want to talk about Columbus as if it's one big German Village and just a bustling quaint beautiful metropolis. It is not. The difference between what you see as a visitor and what you see as an actual resident is massive.

So wouldn't a better comparison be of an equally sized section of the city? Compare one 100K section to another, or one 25 square miles to another 25 square miles. Northland is 25 square miles, while Hilltop, at least according to Wiki, is about 15 square miles. So it's not exactly of equal size or population.

I guess that depends how we're measuring the core. What neighborhoods can be considered core neighborhoods? What boundaries would be fair to use?

I think is this is just another straw man you're tearing down. I didn't see a single person make any claims that all of Columbus was urban or like German Village. What I did see is people using urban neighborhoods like that to say that not all of Columbus was low density suburban, which is kind of what you're arguing it is.