Will Columbus become largest Ohio metro? (Cleveland, Cincinnati: shopping mall, exodus, teaching)

[cheech14]

Originally Posted by bjimmy24

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

You're not wrong, but I do think it would've helped long-term.

[TomJones123]

Originally Posted by cheech14

You're not wrong, but I do think it would've helped long-term.

Annexation could be seen as a mitigating factor and growth of a central entity without adding actual population to an existing area. As a mitigating factor it could allow a city to boost its population without any actual growth except to the entity itself, in this case C-bus. That sort of shell game can mitigate lost revenue from deindustrilization by an increase in federal funds based on population. But annexation causes no actual population growth in terms of actual added people in a given area. Cincinnati and Cleveland's problems seemed to center around job loss, a common fate to many rustbelt cities. Annexation wont help that in terms of actual, tangible benifits to those who lost jobs.

I like annexation because IMO areas tend to grow better when everyone cooperates a little better than they do around the Cincy area...so many Barney Fife fiefdoms here...

[Losfrisco]

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.

As a testament to the general blandness and obscurity of these huge portions of Columbus, I just realized that I've lived in Northland-25 years after the fact.

I lived near Sunderland Drive, which appears to be located between "Northland" and "Northgate."

I guess it was just such a bland place there was no point in trying to figure out what the name of my neighborhood was. I'm wondering what I told people when asked where I live, "north of here", maybe?

Street-viewing around , I can see this looks way more urban than my Hilltop neighborhood as it has.....sidewalks.

[bjimmy24]

Originally Posted by Losfrisco

As a testament to the general blandness and obscurity of these huge portions of Columbus, I just realized that I've lived in Northland-25 years after the fact.

I lived near Sunderland Drive, which appears to be located between "Northland" and "Northgate."

I guess it was just such a bland place there was no point in trying to figure out what the name of my neighborhood was. I'm wondering what I told people when asked where I live, "north of here", maybe?

Street-viewing around , I can see this looks way more urban than my Hilltop neighborhood as it has.....sidewalks.

There are so many neighborhood names that appear on Google maps that I've never heard anyone speak in real life.

[BRNorth]

Originally Posted by cheech14

I am not arguing all Columbus posters have been innocent. Not at all. I agree some have contributed. I just don't think they've been the main problem as has been claimed. Just from sheer poster numbers and volume, from your own evidence, they cannot be.

You said that you call out negative bashing against cities. So why be selective as to when you do that? Either you're applying that consistently, or you're not. Why should anyone get a pass?

My "narrative", if any, is that I read the thread and have come to a very different conclusion than you about what the problems are on the Columbus forum. I don't think that's some kind of agenda, though. Again, I don't have any allegiance to Columbus or its posters.

It seems like you pick and choose what you want to respond to out of specific posts. I was calling out certain Columbus posters who immediately felt the need to start bashing other cities (not just one, but several). They were not innocent. In this very same thread I have also spoken positively of Columbus. I see other posters from other areas as sticking up for their cities after multiple cities we bashed by a Columbus poster(s).

[BRNorth]

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.

Cleveland couldn't annex its surrounding suburbs (like several other older cities) because it had well established inner ring suburbs. Columbus did not. If you look at Columbus' pre-war boundaries, the city has declined in population.

[Losfrisco]

Originally Posted by BRNorth

Cleveland couldn't annex its surrounding suburbs (like several other older cities) because it had well established inner ring suburbs. Columbus did not. If you look at Columbus' pre-war boundaries, the city has declined in population.

I've always thought this to be the case. Do you have an actual count for the present day, pre-war boundary Columbus population?

All it takes is a few glances of old Columbus photos on the internet and you can clearly see that Columbus looked and functioned more like a major city in the 1930's than it does today.

[TomJones123]

Originally Posted by BRNorth

Cleveland couldn't annex its surrounding suburbs (like several other older cities) because it had well established inner ring suburbs. Columbus did not. If you look at Columbus' pre-war boundaries, the city has declined in population.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UhJOx_4WSzg

[cheech14]

Originally Posted by BRNorth

Cleveland couldn't annex its surrounding suburbs (like several other older cities) because it had well established inner ring suburbs. Columbus did not. If you look at Columbus' pre-war boundaries, the city has declined in population.

Yes, that's why I said earlier that annexation was very beneficial. Like most cities after WWII, the core declined. Though from what I understand, that decline was much less severe than elsewhere in the state and region. The core saw really strong growth the last decade or so, so I think that is now reversing. I think Covid interrupted that some, but it seems to be back on track now.

[cheech14]

Originally Posted by BRNorth

It seems like you pick and choose what you want to respond to out of specific posts. I was calling out certain Columbus posters who immediately felt the need to start bashing other cities (not just one, but several). They were not innocent. In this very same thread I have also spoken positively of Columbus. I see other posters from other areas as sticking up for their cities after multiple cities we bashed by a Columbus poster(s).

I really think you're glossing over what has happened in this thread and are not nearly as unbiased and fair as you think you are. That's just my take.

Anyway, instead of pointing fingers and all, I'd rather just have a discussion about the facts of the cities. It's a lot more interesting than this back and forth.