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.
Relocation from Columbus to Sacramento, California, how does it compare, comparable size, sprawling suburbs, weather differences, ethnically diverse cities, similar crime rates, culture shock
I'm considering moving out of columbus, and was wondering if anyone could tell me how sacramento compares to columbus?? I want to be in Cali but dont want a huge city sprawl like san fran or la. sacramento seems to have a comparable size if maybe a little smaller than cbus
Sacramento has fewer people than Columbus, but is considerably more spread out. Almost all of California's cities exploded in size during the 20th century, generally out into sprawling suburbs rather than up (other than San Francisco itself, which couldn't sprawl, although the Bay Area certainly did.)
They do seem kind of similar, really. Both are old industrial/railroad cities of moderate size, generally overshadowed by bigger nearby cities. Weather-wise, Sacramento is hotter and drier. It doesn't snow here. Ethnically, it is very different: large Latino and Asian populations make Sacramento one of the most ethnically diverse cities in the country. Politically, Sacramento has a reputation as being a bit more conservative than the very, very liberal West Coast megalopolises (the Bay Area and Los Angeles) but we're still quite liberal compared to most of the rest of the country. The suburbs are more conservative than the central city. Crime is comparable, maybe a bit lower in Sacramento, although we have fewer cops. More people drive here than in Columbus (public transit was pretty much abandoned following World War II in much of the state and we're just now starting to build it back up.)
But yeah, I can see the similarities. If you're looking for a place that is more "real" and down-to-earth than places like SF or LA, Sacramento might be a good fit for you. It's definitely not a country town, but neither is it earth-shakingly intense (speaking of which, we get far fewer earthquakes than SF or LA!)
Sacramento does sprawl a lot, but so too does Columbus. Most people who move from the midwest prefer Sacramento. The big difference will be what kind of house you can get for a given amount of money. Generally you will be able to buy a much nicer bigger home in a better neighborhood in Columbus than in Sacramento. On the other hand, Sacramento has a much better climate. Not as humid in the summer a lot more temperate in the winter.
In terms of culture shock, Sacramento is probably the closest to the midwest versus the other major cities in California.
Right now, its a little tough finding employment in Sacramento, but if you have a job offer, I suspect you probably will end up preferring Sac to Ohio.
Well, having moved here from Columbus a couple of years ago, I can tell you that they have some significant differences despite being similar in size. Actually, at this moment metro Sacramento is slightly larger than metro Columbus (2.091 mil in Sac, vs 1.754 mil Columbus).
The cities are different in that Columbus is centered around a huge university, while Sacramento isn't. Columbus also has many large and stately areas with huge homes and decent sized lots, such as Dublin, Powell, New Albany, Bexley and Upper Arlington, while this type of setting generally doesn't exist except for much smaller areas in Sacramento.
Sacramento has many small and locally owned stores, while Columbus is much more chain store oriented. The downtowns are very different too, though both are a bit lacking for such large metro areas. The downtown skyline is much more impressive in Columbus, but the street level shopping and downtown vibe is much better in Sacramento. Sacramento doesn't have the vast expanses of parking lots seen in downtown Columbus.
While Columbus has the hip and quaint Short North/Victorian Village and German Village areas, Sacramento has the significantly larger eqivalent area of Midtown.
If considering good vs bad parts of town, I would say that Columbus has a much smaller area that most folks would avoid, and Sacramento has multiple areas that would generally be considered undesirable.
Weather is obviously different in both cities, with Sacramento much hotter during the afternoon during the summer months (June-Sept). Sacramento isn't nearly as cold as Columbus in the winter, and gets no snow. Columbus has rain distributed throughout the year, while Sacramento doesn't see any rain from late April until late September.
However, the most significant difference is organization. Columbus is much more organized in their residential and shopping areas, while Sacramento is much more of a hodge podge. Neither is better than the other, but it is a significant difference between the two cities. In Sacramento, you can have a small neighborhood with very new and expensive homes right across the street from a large modest (or run down) apartment complex, while you don't see that mix at all in Columbus.
I'm guessing that those vast expanses of parking lots seen in downtown Columbus were once neighborhoods that got plowed under by redevelopment? Downtown Sacramento used to have more of them, I have an aerial photo of downtown from the 1970s that shows a dozen or so blocks of parking lots that are not there now...in earlier aerials, they were all dense neighborhoods, and in more contemporary aerials they are occupied by modern buildings built in the last 20-30 years.
Sacramento's hodgepodge neighborhoods come from the fact that most of them were built as developments in the unincorporated county (and one incorporated city absorbed into Sacramento), less regulated by city planners (and city taxes) and then later incorporated into the city limits (Sacramento was a city of about 10 square miles in 1900, 98 square miles in 2000.)
I'm guessing that those vast expanses of parking lots seen in downtown Columbus were once neighborhoods that got plowed under by redevelopment? Downtown Sacramento used to have more of them, I have an aerial photo of downtown from the 1970s that shows a dozen or so blocks of parking lots that are not there now...in earlier aerials, they were all dense neighborhoods, and in more contemporary aerials they are occupied by modern buildings built in the last 20-30 years.
Sacramento's hodgepodge neighborhoods come from the fact that most of them were built as developments in the unincorporated county (and one incorporated city absorbed into Sacramento), less regulated by city planners (and city taxes) and then later incorporated into the city limits (Sacramento was a city of about 10 square miles in 1900, 98 square miles in 2000.)
Nope, the parking lots in downtown Columbus basically replaced buildings that had been knocked down or destroyed by fire, and never rebuilt. It is very strange looking, their downtown is quite large, over four square miles, but with a terrible streetscape. All of the parking lots keep the area an odd mix of tall buildings with large expanses between them.
Interesting comment about the unincorporated areas of the county. In Ohio and Virginia, where I lived the 25 years before moving to Sacramento, this wasn't a problem at all. It would be interesting to compare the development philosophies of Fairfax County (VA), Franklin County (OH) and Sacramento County over the past 40 years.
Another thing occurred to me concerning significant differences between Columbus and Sacramento. In Columbus you have some headquarters of Fortune 500 companies, and they make a huge difference in development discussions. For example, about a dozen year's ago, Columbus had similar problems as Sacramento today with the need for a newer and larger arena. In Columbus, Nationwide Insurance took the lead, and developed a great new arena. In addition, they made the arena the centerpiece of a massive downtown muti-purpose development, similar in many ways to the Railyards problem Sacramento is trying to fix today:
First off I just have to say thanks for all the responses, its great to get some real perspective from people who actually live in the city rather than people who just visited.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wburg
More people drive here than in Columbus (public transit was pretty much abandoned following World War II in much of the state and we're just now starting to build it back up.)
what would u say the average drive time is for a daily commute?? In columbus i would say you can get from the burbs to downtown in rush hour in like 45 minutes...
Quote:
Originally Posted by NewToCA
Columbus had similar problems as Sacramento today with the need for a newer and larger arena. In Columbus, Nationwide Insurance took the lead, and developed a great new arena. In addition, they made the arena the centerpiece of a massive downtown muti-purpose development, similar in many ways to the Railyards problem Sacramento is trying to fix today:
are there any plans to make a new development in sacramento similar to arena district?? and speaking of arena district i love the blue jackets and would love to catch a game when they play in the shark tank (san jose). would it be practical to drive to san jose and back home for a game or would i have to plan on staying in san jose
Nope, the parking lots in downtown Columbus basically replaced buildings that had been knocked down or destroyed by fire, and never rebuilt. It is very strange looking, their downtown is quite large, over four square miles, but with a terrible streetscape. All of the parking lots keep the area an odd mix of tall buildings with large expanses between them.
In most cases, that's what I mean by neighborhoods that got plowed under by redevelopment: buildings that were knocked down.
I found an interesting book on the subject: The Ohio State University Press
I'm very interested in the history of urban planning, and this book looks like some intriguing reading. From the bit I have skimmed it seems like Columbus had similarities with Sacramento: it also had a period of expansion, absorbing unincorporated land, and there were nonwhite neighborhoods downtown that were destroyed in the path of things like freeways and urban renewal projects. There doesn't appear to have been a massive urban-renewal project on the scale of Sacramento's redevelopment era, which may be why its urban center recovered more quickly: it was less thoroughly destroyed than ours. Generally, parking lots in old cities is a sign of where old buildings and old neighborhoods used to be.
Quote:
Interesting comment about the unincorporated areas of the county. In Ohio and Virginia, where I lived the 25 years before moving to Sacramento, this wasn't a problem at all. It would be interesting to compare the development philosophies of Fairfax County (VA), Franklin County (OH) and Sacramento County over the past 40 years.
Indeed it would. I tend to focus a lot on Sacramento and getting more views of how other cities faced redevelopment would be very interesting.
Quote:
Another thing occurred to me concerning significant differences between Columbus and Sacramento. In Columbus you have some headquarters of Fortune 500 companies, and they make a huge difference in development discussions. For example, about a dozen year's ago, Columbus had similar problems as Sacramento today with the need for a newer and larger arena. In Columbus, Nationwide Insurance took the lead, and developed a great new arena. In addition, they made the arena the centerpiece of a massive downtown muti-purpose development, similar in many ways to the Railyards problem Sacramento is trying to fix today:
That's kind of the problem: people who start businesses and do well in Sacramento tend to move away once they get rich. We have state government, which tends to be a rather more conservative institution than private industry. Government agencies normally aren't interested in things like putting their name on an arena.
what would u say the average drive time is for a daily commute?? In columbus i would say you can get from the burbs to downtown in rush hour in like 45 minutes...
are there any plans to make a new development in sacramento similar to arena district?? and speaking of arena district i love the blue jackets and would love to catch a game when they play in the shark tank (san jose). would it be practical to drive to san jose and back home for a game or would i have to plan on staying in san jose
45 minutes is about average here too, a bit less if you count the suburbs within the city limits--a bit more if you count nearby exoburban cities like Elk Grove, Folsom or Roseville. Nearby suburban neighborhoods like Natomas or Land Park, or West Sacramento (a small city just across the river and across the county line) mean a commute of 15-20 minutes.
Please note that ALL of these commute times are driving commute times. Most of the newer suburbs are served by 1-2 buses that pretty much operate during commute hours, almost nothing evenings or weekends.
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.
