Columbus may soon replace Cleveland as the 'Most Diverse City in the State' (Cincinnati: university, live in)

[natininja]

Originally Posted by streetcreed

If you travel to the the "newer" post WWII areas of Columbus are immigrant havens now. You have many asians, indian asians, african immigrants, hispanic. The hispanic are mostly west side. African NE side. and NW side the asian/indian areas. Bethel Henderson roads are the commercial strips there and you have plazas with nothing but amazing ethnic food (NW SIDE) you also have lots of little plazas with Asian bakeries, tea shops, grocery stores where the locals hang out.

Columbus is one of those cities where its more "suburban" looking areas (mostly those built in the 60s to 90s) are now occupied with high foreign born populations. You don't get to see Columbus diversity in the central city (except the grad student types around OSU).

I think that's pretty common for Midwestern cities (and cities in other regions) -- immigrants skipping urban areas. It's just that Columbus gets to call these sprawlburban residents city residents, whereas many other cities do not. Because they are proper cities, without sprawlburbia inflating their populations.

Sorry streetcreed, jbcmh81's defensiveness requires piling on.

[jbcmh81]

Originally Posted by natininja

I think that's pretty common for Midwestern cities (and cities in other regions) -- immigrants skipping urban areas. It's just that Columbus gets to call these sprawlburban residents city residents, whereas many other cities do not. Because they are proper cities, without sprawlburbia inflating their populations.

Sorry streetcreed, jbcmh81's defensiveness requires piling on.

You guys do have options, you know. You could: 1. Place me on ignore if I bother you that much. 2. Continue to drag all number of threads through the mud like this. 3. Try and have a discussion on the ideas and numbers posted. I would personally love #3. If I am so wrong about so much, then I would love for you and others to show where I'm getting it wrong. No one likes to be wrong about something, so why can't it become something more constructive? I'm sure all posters would appreciate that more than this crap, so is it possible or not?

[natininja]

I believe I stood up for Columbus up above. That last post was mostly just yanking your chain, because of your charges the Cincy and C-town feel threatened by Cbus. Which comes across as defensiveness. Houston can pull all sorts of numbers out to show it's doing better than New Orleans, but it is far from threatening to New Orleans.

[streetcreed]

Originally Posted by natininja

I think that's pretty common for Midwestern cities (and cities in other regions) -- immigrants skipping urban areas. It's just that Columbus gets to call these sprawlburban residents city residents, whereas many other cities do not. Because they are proper cities, without sprawlburbia inflating their populations.

Sorry streetcreed, jbcmh81's defensiveness requires piling on.

Yes it is. But really it's common in western and southern cities. The newer post WWII places. In eastern, and some midwestern, you have those asian enclaves in the pre WWII boundaries (like cleveland) also other minorities claim these areas home.

In Columbus is very noticable how much of it's ethnic groups are claiming areas just outside of the central city before the main suburbs. Then you have suburbs, like Dublin, where these groups are migrating in droves. Also, Columbus is a city where its "foreign born population" is more "new immigrant types" asia, africa, middle east, arab, and hispanic. The european immigrants do own shops/restaurants in some of the immigrant strips (like bethel sawmill), but they don't tend to all live in certain neighborhoods, like Cleveland.

[L2DB]

Originally Posted by natininja

sprawlburbia

I approve of this terminology.

[jbcmh81]

Originally Posted by natininja

I believe I stood up for Columbus up above. That last post was mostly just yanking your chain, because of your charges the Cincy and C-town feel threatened by Cbus. Which comes across as defensiveness. Houston can pull all sorts of numbers out to show it's doing better than New Orleans, but it is far from threatening to New Orleans.

The funny thing about all this is that I personally don't feel that either Cincy or Cleveland should feel threatened in any way. They are decent cities with plenty of history and things going for them. They've been underappreciated for several decades now, imo. If I seem to be defensive, it's because it defies all logic for so many people here to suggest that Columbus has zero value or has nothing to offer at the same time it is easily the most successful city in the state right now in terms of economy and growth. 22,765 people seemed to believe it had enough value to move there in the last 2 years, a figure both other cities would kill to have right now, and don't say they wouldn't. This isn't about my feelings for Cincinnati/Cleveland. I have stated several times that I like those cities. This is about how everyone else continuously downplays Columbus' strengths in spite of its success within a state where there are virtually no other cities in similar condition. The only reason I can think of that people do this is because they feel that their own city is threatened in some way. They shouldn't. There can be more than one city in a state that has something good about it.

[jbcmh81]

Originally Posted by streetcreed

Yes it is. But really it's common in western and southern cities. The newer post WWII places. In eastern, and some midwestern, you have those asian enclaves in the pre WWII boundaries (like cleveland) also other minorities claim these areas home.

In Columbus is very noticable how much of it's ethnic groups are claiming areas just outside of the central city before the main suburbs. Then you have suburbs, like Dublin, where these groups are migrating in droves. Also, Columbus is a city where its "foreign born population" is more "new immigrant types" asia, africa, middle east, arab, and hispanic. The european immigrants do own shops/restaurants in some of the immigrant strips (like bethel sawmill), but they don't tend to all live in certain neighborhoods, like Cleveland.

One of the things that gets lost in the sprawl talk is that Columbus is still a Northern city. There are organizations out there that have actually measured the square mileage of cities/metros taken up by sprawl. Columbus has relatively low sprawl compared to the Sun Belt and is pretty much in line with most other cities in the region. Regionally, Cincinnati, Indianapolis, Louisville, etc. all have more sprawl based on land use. This is not to say that a lot of Columbus wasn't built post-WWII. It was. I-270 was a huge catalyst for how the built environment changed. Look at aerial pictures from the 1950s and then again in the 1970s and it's night and day. It was like 100 New Albany's were born within a decade. I am 110% anti-sprawl. I view it as extremely wasteful and a terrible use of open space and farmland. I am an urban person, and I do think Columbus has a lot of work ahead in the infill/density department, but it's nowhere near as bad as people think, at least not in an honest head-to-head comparison.

And you're definitely right about so many immigrants taking over these older strip centers. Without that, these places would've probably declined in a big way. A few year's back, the Dispatch ran a story about this very topic and how immigrants were helping to revitalize the North Side. And immigrants in Columbus are definitely not all concentrated in certain areas. If you look at demographic maps, they're pretty much scattered everywhere, and their populations are growing just about everywhere as well. Columbus will probably never have a version of Little Italy or Koreatown, but it doesn't need to. Those concentrated enclaves are a remnant of a very different past, and the city can benefit from immigrants without those neighborhoods.

[pontiac51]

Originally Posted by jbcmh81

Foreign-Born Area of Origin for Columbus Metro.
Asia: 39.1%
Latin America (including Mexico): 26.2%
Africa: 21.2%
Europe: 11.1%
Other: 2.4%

This compares to the other 2-Cs...

Cleveland
Europe: 46.2%
Asia: 32.7%
Latin America: 14.3%
Africa: 3.6%
Other: 3.2%

Cincinnati
Asia: 37.9%
Latin America: 23.7%
Europe: 22.5%
Africa: 12.0%
Other: 3.9%

If you want to break it down by country, be my guest. But I have to admit, Cleveland is definitely the whitest metro, point proven.

Your numbers don't make any sense. Cleveland by far is the most diverse CSA/MSA of the 3-Cs. It is not the whitest metro. Take a look at the demographic breakdown in each county in the Cleveland CSA (or MSA) , and then tell everyone that Cleveland is the whitest metro. You are not making any sense!!!

[jbcmh81]

Originally Posted by pontiac51

Your numbers don't make any sense. Cleveland by far is the most diverse CSA/MSA of the 3-Cs. It is not the whitest metro. Take a look at the demographic breakdown in each county in the Cleveland CSA (or MSA) , and then tell everyone that Cleveland is the whitest metro. You are not making any sense!!!

Are you saying that because you believe it to be true or because you can prove it?

[1watertiger]

thanks streetceed, next time we will visit and check out those areas for some food . jbcmh81, yes you take alot of heat trying to bolster cbus.. but cbus to many people from older cities or from cities with many different nationality groups will seem like "white bread". the 3-cs are very different and opinions will vary.. yes columbus is gaining population but the area is still small and the infrastructure (freeways,streets,etc) only solidify this imo. yes i think cleveland is head and shoulders above cbus. when i visit and travel around cincy i see (reality) how much bigger cincy is over cbus also. thats just a fact.